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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Better default step size for KoUnitSpinBox
From:       Florian Merz <FlorianMerz () gmx ! de>
Date:       2008-03-13 20:21:58
Message-ID: 200803132121.58963.FlorianMerz () gmx ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Donnerstag, 13. März 2008 schrieb Thomas Zander:
> ...
> Its a matter of taste, I guess.
> To me it makes sense to have
>  KoUnit::unitName(KoUnit::Millimeter);
> instead of
>  KoUnit mm(KoUnit::Millimeter);
>  mm.unitName();
> It makes sense to me because its more logical to ask the class for a name
> then to ask an instance which may confuse you to think that there is a
> corresponding setter to go with it.

I've been using it like this:
kDebug() << unit.toUserStringValue() << " " KoUnit::unitName(unit);

and I was wondering why I can't do this:
kDebug() << unit.toUserStringValue() << " " unit.unitName();

I never thought about your use case, sorry about that.

> > Also, is there a reason why KoUnit is placed in libs/odf? It took me
> > some time to find it there. It's an integral part of the application,
> > not just a part of the file format, right?
>
> In KOffice the dependency graph is currently the folowing;
>
>  kostore
>  += koodf
>     +=  main
>
> with others like flake depending on those etc.
> In other words; kostore is as far up the dependency graph as you can get
> and KoOdf is slightly less 'core'.
> So, I guess that your statement of "just part of the fileformat" is where
> our perception differs; the fileformat is a central library that the rest
> is build on top of.

Good to know, thanks.

> Cheers!
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

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