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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Some questions regarding development for KDE3
From:       Guillaume Laurent <glaurent () telegraph-road ! org>
Date:       2007-01-19 14:56:34
Message-ID: 200701191556.34152.glaurent () telegraph-road ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 19 January 2007 15:10, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>
> > Overloads are more common in libraries, true, but that's a rather
> > specific case. In applications they are more rare, so IMHO in the
> > general case you don't need the whole method signature.
>
> Any numbers to back that up?

Nope, only my experience.

> I mean, I do understand that _you_ don't 
> want to set the signature, but I doubt that everybody thinks the same
> way, especially as IMHO the class tree is more for exploring the code
> than for navigation-while-coding.

Then I'd say that it's even more a reason to hide signatures. When you're 
exploring code you want a synthetic view of it, not every details. Knowing 
that a class has a draw() method is enough, you don't need to have the 
details of each and every overloaded version of it.

> > That's true, Idea solved this by automagically opening all the
> > intermediate nodes between the top node and the result, I hope Eclipse
> > will add this eventually.
>
> Thats not a bit better either, the I'd have a problem as soon as I find
> 200 files in 150 different tree's. absolute nightmare to navigate too.

If your source tree has 150 subtrees under a single node, one could argue that 
it's seriously broken. Anyway, in most cases the results which interest you 
are under a few specific trees, so it's not really a problem.

> BTW: the same eclipse version unning under WinXP is much better.

Yes, Java under Linux is still sub-par, shame.

-- 
Guillaume.
http://telegraph-road.org
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]