On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:23:19AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | > This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are > | > handled. > | > | Couldn't we settle for a flat 'lyx' namespace? > > I'd really, really rather not. > > Once we have all code changed to be in lyx and subnamespaces the > hassle will also be less than it is right now.
I hope you are right... > Also the use of subnamespaces makes it f.ex. possible to move > Inset::Code out of Inset and to reside in lyx::insets directly. lyx::InsetCode would do for me personally. But hey, everybody has his pets... It's just this 'there might be more important things out there' feeling. What about the InsetText changes for instance? [State-of-the-art in the current BRANCH_NOUPDATE] Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
