I'm back :-)

Sandy Meier smeier at kdevelop.org
Tue Aug 15 12:41:40 UTC 2000


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. 


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