[glideplan_swproj] Re: [glideplan_swproj] Libraries

  • From: Tomáš Zámečník <pulcik@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: glideplan_swproj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 12:54:23 +0100 (CET)

Yes, we must use one style.
Hmmm... I vote for myself :-D

It was said that the data access libraries will be separated from plugins,
so the Ales's airspace parser should be changed/moved anyway.

Your style seems to be quite similar to my one. There are only differences in 
of the directories.
If you have something only in your branch and not in the master it will not be 
used by others.
...I mean: I didn't know about your library - in other case I would used the 
same naming of dirs.

I already created the CMakeLists for libs and tested loading/importing of the 
cup library and it's function(s).

Btw.: Using only Q_DECL_EXPORT in header will probably be insufficient ...I 
wrote about it in the last mail.


> ------------ Původní zpráva ------------
> Od: Kuba Marek <blue.cube@xxxxxxxxx>
> Předmět: [glideplan_swproj] Libraries
> Datum: 05.1.2012 12:32:29
> ----------------------------------------
> Hi,
> we created three of the data access libraries and each of them is in
> different style.
> tomas:
> https://github.com/updraft/updraft/tree/master/Updraft/src/libraries
> ales:
> https://github.com/updraft/updraft/tree/master/Updraft/src/plugins/airspaces/parser
> me:
> https://github.com/updraft/updraft/tree/Kuba/Updraft/src/libs
> we should choose one of these styles (or create another :-) ) and hold
> on to it, right?
> Kuba

To visit archive or unsubscribe, follow:

Other related posts:

  • » [glideplan_swproj] Re: [glideplan_swproj] Libraries - Tomáš Zámečník