Re: More everything into the octave namespace

[John W. Eaton]

On 08/11/2016 12:11 AM, Carnë Draug wrote:
> There's been a lot of stuff moved into the octave namespace.  Sounds
> right to me that we move everything somewhere into the octave namespace.
> Is that the plan?
>
> If we are heading that way, I'd prefer if it was all done in one go
> (upcoming Octave 4.2 release), instead of gradually.  Makes it easier
> to have a package that supports both versions, specially if it involves
> renaming functions (maintaing a package that supports old and new Octave
> versions when such changes happen is a burden.  If I can limit it to
> the Octave 4.0 -> 4.2 transition that would be better).
>
> Should we start moving everything into namespaces?  And if so, what
> should we leave in the octave namespace, and what goes into nested
> namespaces?
>
> The doxygen docs were updated recently so we can have a list of the
> current existing classes [1].
>
> Looking forward to start using octave::Array<T>.

Yes, the plan is to move things to namespaces.

I've been doing this incrementally because I want to change most names 
that are of the form "octave_foo" to be "octave::foo" instead.  So it's 
not as simple as just inserting "namespace octave {" at the top of every 
file and "}" at the bottom.

jwe