[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Graphics code small questions?
From: |
Michael Goffioul |
Subject: |
Re: Graphics code small questions? |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:31:30 +0100 |
On 1/14/08, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 14-Jan-2008, Michael Goffioul wrote:
>
> | 1) Most of the code within the object classes is common; should we
> | try to generate this code as well?
>
> It would be OK with me to generate any code that follows the same
> patterns. But I'd like to be careful to avoid making the script that
> generates the code overly complex to deal with any special cases (I
> haven't looked, so I don't know whether this might be a problem).
Most of the code of classes inherited from base_graphics_object is
common (actually, I don't get why this code is repeated in each
inherited class). Another possibility would be to move the common
code into base_graphics_object class. For instance, instead of the
current remove_child implementation, I'd propose the following:
virtual void remove_child (const graphics_handle& h)
{
if (valid_object ())
get_properties ().remove_child (h);
else
error ("base_graphics_object::remove_child: invalid graphics object");
}
What do you think about it?
Michael.