Project directory structure

[Tomaz Canabrava]

Dirk, Alberto,

since my Mainwindow is `done` in the meaning that it currently resembles
the Gtk mainwindow, I whould like to start from that branch ( with the two
methods that Alberto alredy did, the open and save dialogs. )

I`m fixing the indentation issues ( spaces vs tabs ) and code style for a
merge in the main `qt` branch.

Dirk, I whould appreciate a help of the old times, specially because it`s
too easy to break something when doing refactorings.

T



2013/4/4 Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org>

>
> On Apr 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote:
> > i like what Dirk proposes to keep the .c files (logic) in the linux
> > kernel coding style and leave .cpp part (UI) in a more Qt/C++ish
> > style. a mixture between the two in a .cpp file, i don't particularly
> > like:
> >
> > m_someMember <- could be mSomeMember
> > INTERFACE_SomeMethodName_start <- bad idea
> > some_member_functino <- leave that to Qt under the hood, use
> someMemberFunction
> > some_global_function <- perhaps should be someGlobalFunction in a .cpp
> > file and the former in a .c file
>
> I think a function (or variable) name style (camelCase or under_score)
> is then determined by where the function (or variable) is defined. If it
> is C code called from C++ it should be under_score. If it is C++ called
> from C (I think the current plan is not to have this) then it would be
> camelCase.
>
> So yes, that will mean some mixed code but that's unavoidable.
>
> > btw, i really did propose a short discussion about the coding style.
> > with smart around it can be agreed upon usually in a couple of days...
>
> I don't think this has anything to do with 'smart'. It's how flexible
> people
> are that makes the difference here. If both sides are smart and stubborn
> this can take forever (been there, done that).
>
> But I think we have this all mostly settled:
>
> Reasonably consistent indentation and whitespace handling everywhere.
> camelCase in C++
> under_score in C
> Point of origin (where it is defined) determines which in case it's used in
> both parts of the code.
>
> We have the Menu structure mostly settled (the Edit menu is still an
> option).
>
> We decided that the core logic becomes a library to be called from the UI.
>
> Is there anything else that needs to be decided before people can dig in
> deeper? I know that Tomaz and Alberto have talked about working together
> but haven't seen an announcement of a current tree anywhere.
>
> Also, do Qt people want the old timers to help separate out the core logic
> into a library?
> I'm not sure what would be helpful to you.
>
> /D
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hohndel.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20130404/931dd818/attachment.html>