[Uml-devel] UMLWidget all set for the new change ?

[Oliver Kellogg]

On Wednesday 11 June 2008 22:46, Gopala Krishna wrote:
>
>    After getting the initial QCanvas to QGraphicsView port *compile* i
> chalked out some plans where I want to use bottom up approach.
> I mean, i would first like to redesign the foundation classes to use
> full potential of frameworks of qt.
>
> So i started with umlwidget and i am prefixing the new classes with "New"
> For eg UMLWidget -> NewUMLWidget
>
> Eventually NewUMLWidget becomes UMLWidget. I don't do this now to
> avoid hefty unnecessary compile time as well as too many chains of
> resulting errors as UMLWidget is used in many files.

Yeah, I know what you mean. :)

> The new hierarchy would be as shown in the screenshot here
> http://picasaweb.google.com/krishna.ggk/Projects/photo#5210725735018863490

Okay.
I'm not quite sure what the NewUMLRectWidget does.
Are you planning for it to add the rectangle property a la QGraphicsRectItem?

> Currently i have implemented NewUMLWidget. Here are the links
> 1) newumlwidget.h   ---
> http://websvn.kde.org/branches/work/soc-umbrello/umbrello/newumlwidget.h?re
>vision=819703&view=markup 2) newumlwidget.cpp ---
> http://websvn.kde.org/branches/work/soc-umbrello/umbrello/newumlwidget.cpp?
>revision=819707&view=markup

Looks fine to me.

> As you can see, there are some intended change in method names like
> documentation() instead of getDoc()
> setDocumentation() instead of setDoc()
> Basically i have tried not to use *get* prefix to follow regular
> kde/qt coding style.

Sure.

> I now need your valuable feedback regarding
>  1) My direction and approach
>  2) My style of coding (i thought we have an opportunity to change the
> style now)
>
> I finally mention it again that my exams are nearing. So i can spend
> very little time for umbrello which i decided to use it to set up the
> base foundation classes.
> So dont forget to give your feedback :)

All a-ok with me, but then I'm not that deeply involved with the Umbrello
code anymore. Perhaps Sharan/Kleag/Andi et al. could further comment.

Again, good luck!

Oliver