source code may be getting a bit intimidating
dirk at hohndel.org
Mon Jan 7 11:32:05 PST 2013
"Lubomir I. Ivanov" <neolit123 at gmail.com> writes:
>> I'm willing to consider patches that make sense. That make things more
>> structured, easier to understand and to follow. And that
>> DO NOT INCLUDE ANY OTHER MODIFICATIONS.
> of course, this thread is technically just a reminder in the case of
> lead developers and maintainers, yet still would be interesting to see
> contributor opinions.
Me, too. Except that you are contributor #3 and after that it falls off
quite dramatically. Which I guess is part of the problem that you are
trying to address :-)
> after all, often the complains is what forces a maintainer to flip a
> certain switch. if there are none, i guess we're good for now...
Actually, I took my own advice and just pushed out a commit that moves
the new planner UI from gtk-gui.c to planner.c. And as mentioned above,
there are NO OTHER MODIFICATIONS in that commit (besides the .h /
#include changes necessary to make it actually, you know, work).
So this took 450 loc out of gtk-gui that I just recently added to it.
> what i can't really avoid mentioning, is the fact that spending 5-10
> (or more) minutes, often when planning a new feature, thinking about
> physical structure (files and folders) and how said feature will
> become a modular or integral part of the code base can pretty much be
> the most satisfying aspect of source code project development... and
> actually everything in this aspect is a function of good naming - good
> naming of folders, files, functions etc; it can lead to a healthy code
> i'm not some sort of evangelist about these things or have some sort
> of a OCD. so, at the same time i don't find this to be the most
> important part of project development. i've just learned to respect
> this part.
I have been accused of being OCD about other things... but I will admit
that I don't share that pleasure at all...
More information about the subsurface