[webkit-dev] Style guide should mention that we don't use anonymous namespace
jknotten at chromium.org
Wed Oct 19 15:50:52 PDT 2011
I would recommend wrapping such classes in an anonymous namespace to avoid
surprising link errors due to unintentional name collision. Such problems
can also be difficult to spot at first as sometimes the linker "just" works
and then you get a seg fault sometime later.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote:
> How about classes that are only used in one cpp file? Should we be wrapping
> those in an anonymous namespace?
> - Ryosuke
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Darin Adler <darin at apple.com> wrote:
>> The guideline is not to disallow anonymous namespaces.
>> It’s to prefer “static” over anonymous namespaces when either one would
>> Debugging tools on at least some of the platforms work better with
>> functions that are given internal linkage by using the “static” keyword
>> rather than functions that are inside anonymous namespaces.
>> On the other hand, anonymous namespaces are a more powerful tool that can
>> do more than the “static” keyword can.
>> -- Darin
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the webkit-dev