Home » U++ Library support » U++ Library : Other (not classified elsewhere) » U++ suggestions
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++... [message #17827 is a reply to message #17826] |
Sat, 30 August 2008 10:05   |
 |
mirek
Messages: 14265 Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
amrein wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 22:10 |
You are true. I really need more time to understand it. I tried again an again and each time someone show me I'm missing something.
Well, 34 years old, sys+net admin, and U++ make me feel I'm becoming old.
My problem: I compare "Assemblies" with Linux file system layout. "Nest" with LD_LIBRARY_PATH + PATH. "Packages" with SRPMS and their build dependencies.
|
Well, I think this nicely demonstrates what is wrong with "Package" name 
Package is basically a library in source form with dependencies etc.
Nest is just a directory that contains packages.
Assembly is ordered set of nests. Means, if something is close to LD_LIBRARY_PATH + PATH, it is Assembly. Also, you can have multiple assemblies. Means assembly is assembly of various groups of packages.
Quote: |
I don't understand. You can have a complete book in HTML. Doxygen output can be HTML. You can select whatever font you want, colours, styles, tables, frames, even scripts...
All features from QTF are in HTML. Only problem: include images.
|
Yep, that is one problem. There are more.
Quote: |
Cool!! If this help could be in fact in the source (with HTML tags, because doxygen can handle them) and if TheIDE could show or hide it from the source, them it would completely turn upside down the world of IDEs.
|
For now, the idea is to have then in T++. That is BTW one of reasons why T++ is inside package - it will always travel with the code.
In fact, bases of this already exist, see
http://www.ultimatepp.org/app$ide$Topic$en-us.html
the two problems are that
a) without the left bar in the editor, the process is tedious
b) our C++ parser needs to be more reliable
Quote: |
Thanks for your answers. I don't bother you more. Ask me if you want help for the automatic build system.
|
It is OK, keep complaining. I do not see this as completely unproductive, if nothing else, it keeps me remembering why we have chosen some ways...
Mirek
[Updated on: Sat, 30 August 2008 10:26] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
 |
|
U++ suggestions
By: amrein on Fri, 29 August 2008 18:43
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: mirek on Fri, 29 August 2008 20:01
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: amrein on Fri, 29 August 2008 23:52
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: mirek on Sat, 30 August 2008 01:52
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: amrein on Sat, 30 August 2008 04:10
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: mirek on Sat, 30 August 2008 10:05
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: mirek on Sat, 30 August 2008 15:12
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: cocob on Mon, 01 September 2008 11:31
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: cbpporter on Mon, 01 September 2008 11:36
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: cocob on Mon, 01 September 2008 11:47
|
 |
|
Re: User lists of "bad" naming of classes, functions etc in U++...
By: mirek on Mon, 01 September 2008 14:00
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Jul 16 13:32:14 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02349 seconds
|