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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] UI abstraction proposal (partially only)
From:       Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-06-03 7:31:46
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 03 June 2003 00:00, Andreas Gungl wrote:
>
> attached you find a diff containing a first idea on how to separate
> the UI code from the processing code. It covers only the address book
> access in KMail.
> I formed an abstract class for the UI callbacks, then I inherited a
> class covering the current Gui interactions.

While this in principle makes sense (we have similar classes in libkabc 
and ksync), I think it would be better to store the callback object in 
a member variable instead of passing it as parameter to all functions 
using it. That makes the API much clearer.

> I would like to have some comments on the patch, especially on naming
> conventions and related topics. E.g. the classes are named
> *GuiCallback, IMO it's better readable than *UiCallback, although
> text UIs are of course possible.

I think "Ui" is better than "Gui" because it's more acurate. In addition 
I don't think that it's necessary to include "Callback" in the class 
name as it doesn't provide any information what the class is meant to 
do. My suggestion would be to name the class "AddressBookUi".

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher@kde.org>
_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]