[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: KConfig object-orientification
From:       Thomas Zander <zander () planescape ! com>
Date:       2001-11-02 13:55:45
[Download RAW message or body]


On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 11:02:22AM -0800, Charles Samuels wrote:
> On Thursday 01 November 2001 11:47 am, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > On Thursday 01 November 2001 10:33 am, Charles Samuels wrote:
> > > On Thursday 01 November 2001 11:22 am, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 31 October 2001 11:45 pm, Charles Samuels wrote:
> > > > > This makes it compatible with old version, except for a few small
> > > > > things.
> > > >
> > > > It still rearranges the class structure which is unnecassery and
> > > > unacceptable IMO. You also have a complete duplication of the
> > > > KConfigBase API which really is unnecassery.
> > >
> > > Backwards compatibility wasn't my idea (I don't really favor it, for that
> > > matter).
> >
> > Then I don't think it has a place in KDE 3.
> >
> > > And inheriting from KConfigBase is both messy, requires all those
> > > functions to be virtual (slowing it down), and requires more memory at
> > > run time (since the members of KConfigBase will be duplicated).
> >
> > Bullshit, you only need to override the lookupData and putData methods and
> > *surprise* those are virtual already.
> 
> So send a patch :P

Before this gets ugly;
Charles, we all like the stuff you are creating, it has great ideas and stuff 
like that. But please try to work together instead of fighting your way through
the opinions of others (I am imagining it feels that way).
If a number of people tell you they want backwards compatibility, try to understand
why they have a need for this and try to gain knowledge about the subject before 
you just cry 'send a patch' which is not really nice for all involved...

For me the beauty of working in KDE is the huge ground of experience, and the
willingness to share. I share an idea and others find refinements to perfect,
working in the same direction etc. bla bla.

Well before this gets to be a major speech, Charles; please don't behave like 
you have not slept for much to long and try to listen to the well ment advice
of others. Thanx.


And, Waldo; your words are to harsh IMO :)

-- 
Thomas Zander                                            zander@earthling.net
The only thing worse than failure is the fear of trying something new

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]