From kopete-devel Sun May 12 16:03:15 2002 From: Andres Krapf Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 16:03:15 +0000 To: kopete-devel Subject: Re: [Kopete-devel] more design discussions (an also,KMMF bugs) X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kopete-devel&m=102130849117508 On Sunday 12 May 2002 03:42, Martijn Klingens wrote: > If you want to support value-based KopeteMessages as opposed to using > pointers to them you do. After all the operator= should be made virtual if > the size of the object is unknown. If we use pointers then you're right, > although I thought we agreed that the ability to allow copying KMs was a > big plus. ah ok, didn't know we wanted value based KMs. i still believe allowing KM subclasses isn't really that heavyweight (even if it's got a vtbl). but i do foresee other problems, like the creation the message (we'd need a factory method provided by the plugin... would be a bit more complex). > Sure. But apart from the optionsWidget, or whatever the post-0.4 approach > will be I don't see that much cases for such roundtrips. that's true as long as we don't use subclasses :-). ok, let's postpone this discussion. > Uhm... implement *what* ? (Note that I rather try to fix the chats in MSN > though, that's another showstopper for putting KMM branch out as 0.4.) KMPluginData (or whatever approach is chosen). though if you're busy with MSN chats, somebody else should be doing it... cheers, -- Andres _______________________________________________ Kopete-devel mailing list Kopete-devel@mail.kde.org http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel