RFC: adding some IDL syntax sugar

Stephan Bergmann sbergman at redhat.com
Wed Dec 12 02:07:16 PST 2012

On 12/12/2012 10:58 AM, Noel Grandin wrote:
> I'd like to add some IDL syntax sugar, so that instead of doing this:
>        module com {  module sun {  module star {  module formula {
>        }; }; }; };
> we can do this:
>        module com::sun::star::formula {
>        };

(Or even drop the module { ... } wrapper completely and use fully 
qualified names in entity declarations, as each declaration is typically 
in its own .idl file?)

> Which is consistent with how namespaces are used elsewhere, and much
> much easier on the eyes.

I planned to start musing again post LO 4.0 about the UNO type story, 
all the way from .idl to .rdb (incl. questions like whether we want to 
keep the existing UNOIDL syntax at all).

But that change should be rather easy to implement anyway, and is 
definitely an improvement in the current situation, so feel free to go 
ahead, I'd say.


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list