On Sunday 27 July 2003 00:16, Andreas Gungl wrote:
>
> Any comments, hints and whatever are welcome as everytime.

Just a little nitpicking, I can't comment on the content of the patch, 
because I didn't really look at it:

- Instead of naming the class "KMailClient" it might be better to name 
it "Client" and put it into the "KMail" namespace. This has the same 
effect, but makes the code a little bit clearer inside of KMail.

- The include guard should better be "#define KMAIL_CLIENT_H" instead of 
"#define CLIENT_H". Chances that KMail sometimes includes another 
CLIENT_H somewhere aren't high but probably above zero.

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher@kde.org>
_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail