[gmpi] Re: conventions opinions
- From: "Jack O'Quin" <joq@xxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:01:32 -0600
David Olofson <david@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Monday 07 March 2005 22.48, Koen Tanghe wrote:
>> On Monday, March 07, 2005 5:49 AM [GMT+1=CET],
>> Tim Hockin <xxxthockin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> > Why do people break the inlines out of the headers?
>>
>> Because some people want as few implementation details as possible
>> in the header, which merely declares the "interface" (not in the COM
>> sense ;-)) to your class. I guess it's a matter of "information
>> hiding".
>
> Well, that's a good point - and I generally agree with the idea of
> keeping the documentation and the code as closely together as
> possible. (Out-of-sync documentation is one major PITA!)
>
> But what's wrong with just putting that stuff in other headers, using
> the standard extensions...? I don't like messing with conventions
> that all sorts of tools - and people - rely on.
Exactly. Nothing wrong with well-structured header files, but please
use the standard .h and .hpp extensions.
--
joq
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own
words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.
Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
