I see an increasing number of patches using anonymous namespaces instead
of 'static'. This is debugger unfriendly: setting a breakpoint in gdb
for 'foo' in an anonymous namespace requires the following syntax:
b (anonymous namespace)::foo
(If there's a less verbose way of doing this, please let me know.)
Do we have some good reason for preferring anonymous namespaces? Yes, I
understand that there are certain cases (making types anonymous; certain
template arguments) where 'static' is less powerful:
http://www.comeaucomputing.com/techtalk/#nostatic
But on balance the debugger inconvenience doesn't make them worth it for
the common case IMO.
Thoughts?
Jason
--
"The good news is that in 1995 we will have a good operating system and
programming language; the bad news is that they will be Unix and C++."
- Richard P. Gabriel, "Worse is Better"
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
