I'm back :-)
Sandy Meier
smeier at kdevelop.org
Tue Aug 15 12:41:40 UTC 2000
Hi!
Am Die, 15 Aug 2000 schrieben Sie:
> Two things:
>
> I will try to merge the classparser/tokenizer part of the
> patch into KDevelop2, but in some other areas I think it
> is a bit suboptimal. For example, I doubt anybody uses
> C++ and Objective C in the same project, so a check box
> for Objective C in the 'New Class' seems to be quite sense-
> less. Instead, I would prefer to make C, C++, Objective C and
> 'Qt-C++' (C++ with signals and slots) dialects of the same
> language. This has the advantage that e.g. the 'Add method' dialog
> can leave out boxes for signals in a plain C++ project
> after it has asked the language plugin via
> KDevLanguageSupport::hasFeature().
But the "Add method" dialog is part of the languagesupport plugin, so if we add
language support for C/C++/Objective C there will be three different dialogs
or ?
I would prefer this way (3 seperate dialogs), because these 3
languages are _really_ different in options and sourcecode generation. Another
advantage would be smaller memory usage as the dialogs contain no "if,else
stuff" to handle the different dialects.
Ciao!
Sandy
--
email: smeier at kdevelop.org ICQ: 27681958
the KDevelop project: http://www.kdevelop.org
offline/vacation from: 18.8.2000-4.9.2000
--Ertrus faellt nicht!--
More information about the KDevelop-devel
mailing list