Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-08 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 05:48:53PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | I am also a bit wary as I did exactly the same thing about three years > | ago (I could check CVS for specific dates) in my day time job project - and > | undid it shortly afterwa

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | I am also a bit wary as I did exactly the same thing about three years | ago (I could check CVS for specific dates) in my day time job project - and | undid it shortly afterwards. So this was a complete waste of time. Let me waste some more time then, a

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:54:31AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > | > This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are > | > handled. > | > | Why this sudden fad for making the code harder to read for no apparent > | purpose ?? > > *plonk* ?? Maybe you want the question

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 10:37:36AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | lyx::InsetCode would do for me personally. > > with lyx::insets::Code you could use just Code in a lot of places. I know. But even if I am a big fan of short names in the short range, I find them confusing on a long distanc

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | 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 x

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
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

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
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 al

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
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? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do the

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-06 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: | | > This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are | > handled. | | | Why this sudden fad for making the code harder to read for no apparent | purpose ?? *plonk*

Re: [patch] introduce namespace lyx::insets

2003-07-06 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 01:58:46AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > This patch introduces namespace lyx::insets. both xforms and qt are > handled. Why this sudden fad for making the code harder to read for no apparent purpose ?? regards john