Re: Scripting update - News flash

> On Saturday 20 July 2002 00:07, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> > to identify the dcop interfaces for the different documents/views,
> > geiseri and I have come up with an new naming (which can even BC
> > introduced intro the current ktexteditor interfaces)
> >
> > Document#12-InterfaceName
> >
> > and
> >
> > View#4-13-InterfaceName
> >
> > View#4-13 means: Document number 4, View number 13
> >
> > What does we win:
> > Ah complete clear order of the interfaces to the belonging document and
> > view, and even a document -> <- view relation.
> >
> > How we does it:
> >
> > we introduce a new methode
> >
> > void set"InterfaceName"DCOPPrefix (const QCString &) to each interface (a
> > non virtual methode, needs no implementation in the part)
> >
> > and the parts which implement the interface call it like
> >
> > setEditInterfaceDCOPPrefix (jsdfkldsjfkl)
> >
> > in their constructor of for example the document.
> >
> > That is perhaps not that nice, but one of the only BC ways to change the
> > naming to a useful pattern with the many interfaces and multi-inheritance
> > (the interfaces can't give themself the right name, as they know nothing
> > about the view/document they get.

Actually, the more I look at this, the less I like it. All I see is a waste of 
CPU cycles, first when a document is loaded, doing string operations for each 
of a growing number of interfaces, next in case of typeing a script/command 
that will take longer, and in case a script is run, the routine to decide on 
an interface again needs extra string operations.

Changing the names of interfaces cannot change how dcop works.

Is there any reason at all to do this? I think no. Please remove it again.

-anders