On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 07:56:29AM +0100, ans...@garbe.us wrote: > > But regarding the typedefs for structs: C has only a few namespace > > features, so lets not dismantle the probably most used one, alright? > > "struct stat" can be something different from "stat()"! I like that > > namespace thing so much I even use it in C++ (declaring objects with > > "class foo object;"). Not that I use C++ all that often, but, you know, > > professional obligations and shit. > > Why do you bring typedefs in correlation with namespaces?
I think you are confusing the C namespaces (struct names are in a different namespace than function names) and C++ ones. Markus was talking of the former. By the way, C++ ones have nothing to do with OOP, its just a way of solving name clashes, it provides language support for an already existing practice in C, where almost every reasonable library will prefix all its external symbol with some 'lib_' prefix. Maxime.
