Axel Dörfler <"Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:> "Waldemar Kornewald" <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > If not you could do something like this: > > > namespace PPP { > > > class FinalStateMachine() > > > }; > > > > > > Just a suggestion; since you are doing the work, it's up to you > > > to > > > decide :-) > > There is no way to have a clean interface without making this class > > publicly accessible. Otherwise the FSM events (mentioned in the > > RFC) > > will be spread over two or more classes which makes it harder to > > read. > > Namespaces don't make classes private - just use either: > > PPP::FinalStateMachine > > or > > using namespace PPP; > FinalStateMachine > > or what have you thought of? Is PPPStateMachine not good enough? :) If the others vote for it, too, I will put everything into the namespace PPP. Hmmm, I could put it into Kernel::Network::PPP. :) Waldemar