<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Thomas Baumgart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:thb@net-bembel.de">thb@net-bembel.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">On Thursday 15 October 2009 04:46:53 Alvaro Soliverez wrote:<br>
> > > I commited to SVN a fix for saving XML files. It's not what I would<br>
> > > have liked to do but because of the state of the saveFile and<br>
> > > saveToLocalFile functions this was the best compromise from my point of<br>
> > > view. When I say 'the state' of these functions I mean that the code is<br>
> > > not quite<br>
> ><br>
> > straight<br>
> ><br>
> > > forward to read.<br>
> ><br>
> > I added another fix which also make it possible to save a remote file. I<br>
> > moved<br>
> > all calls to open() into the saveToLocalFile(). I labeled the commit "Fix<br>
> > a combo in the icalendar plugin settings page." by mistake, sorry for<br>
> > that. I'll<br>
> > try to be more careful in the future.<br>
><br>
> I've been thinking about this. Shouldn't all these methods be moved to the<br>
> engine?<br>
> That way, we could unit test them.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Don't know. They are depending on the UI. And I still try to keep the engine<br>
free of UI code.<br>
<div class="im"><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree, the parts depending on UI code should stay on the views, but I think there is a big chunk of these methods (saveToLocalFile, saveToDatabase, etc) that might be best placed in the engine.</div>
<div> </div></div>