Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The subject says it all.
|
| I have announce that I will do that a number of times so I expect
| (hope) that I will have no objection.
I have no objections per se. But I'll look through the patch anyway.
One note though: The pimpl was originally added to reduce dependencies
(you already handled most of that) and thus to reduce compile time.
Have you done any compile time checking before and after the change?
Not really required must interesting for the curious.
Didn't check but I expect no difference as the only additional header
include in BufferView_pimpl.h was cursor.h.
Perhaps remove the destructor completely, it seems that we could just
as well use the compiler generated one.
yes.
| int BufferView::workWidth() const
| {
| - return pimpl_->width();
| + return width_;
| }
We have several of these simple functions now. Later we should
remember to look at the profiler and see if we should move some of
these accessors inline.
Indeed.
| void BufferView::scroll(int lines)
This function is commented out like this in the old pimpl as well?
Yes.
No comments why it is commented out?
No.
Abdel.
