[Kde-bindings] Splitting up the SMOKE library

[Richard Dale]

On Sunday 15 July 2007, Arno Rehn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just thought about splitting the SMOKE libraries, so that SmokeKDE would
> only contain the KDE classes, SmokeQsci only QScintilla classes etc.,
> because at the moment it is rather ugly that we need to have all the Qt
> classes again in SmokeKDE and can't split Qwt and QScintilla from SmokeQt.
> In theory it is quite simple and I think I have something like a concept.
> However it would require one or more changes in the API of Smoke, so we
> also would have to update the sources of all the bindings that depend on
> Smoke. The one change that will probably affect most parts of the bindings
> is that I'd plan to make Smoke::Index a struct that looks like
>
> struct Index {
> 	short index;
> 	Smoke *smoke;
> };
>
> What do you think of splitting up Smoke? If you want to, I can give more
> details on what I would do to split it up and make it work correctly.
That's exactly what the existing design does, but it has a subclass of Smoke 
(from smoke.h), for every module. Instead of having just a global qt_Smoke 
handle, we have one for each module. There are quite a few places where the 
global 'qt_Smoke' handle is used, and we would need to think through how to 
change them to use a module-specific handle instead. Or find a way of getting 
from qt_Smoke to the other modules in the runtime?

-- Richard