Talk:Fully qualified name
Add topic | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 October 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Give example on how to use :: in C++.
- I did a complete rewrite EvanCarroll 19:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Merging with Fully Qualified {Path|File} Name
[edit]Merging the contents of Fully_qualified_file_name and Fully_qualified_path_name into this article, and moving the existing contents into a section "Fully Qualified Class Name" is definitely a good idea. Jim no.6 (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
- It is definitely a bad idea. FQFN and FQDN should remain separated. My counter-proposal: do nothing. We already have a WP:CONCEPTDAB article, and if more FQxN articles on specific applications were required, then Wikipedia would create it. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- What about renaming this article to "Fully qualified class name" and making this "Fully qualified name" a disamb? Frap (talk) 09:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that would be inventing reality. We don't coin terms. We just report on them. Stevebroshar (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- What about renaming this article to "Fully qualified class name" and making this "Fully qualified name" a disamb? Frap (talk) 09:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Concerns
[edit]I fixed the talk page redirect and duplicate text in the article. Does the article give clear examples? One example of a fully qualified name in Java is:
//not fully qualified import java.util.Scanner; Scanner userInput = new Scanner(System.in); vs. //fully qualified java.util.Scanner userInput = new java.util.Scanner(System.in)
Thanks --NoToleranceForIntolerance (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't think 'Fully qualified name' is a notable term
[edit]It's a term alright, but not notable. It can be described with real world examples, but in practice it's not a thing on its own. We are pattern matching to find something that we're calling notable. And a single or few citations does not make it notable. Stevebroshar (talk) 17:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)