Richard Heck wrote:
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 07:21:51PM +0200, Peter Kümmel wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Peter Kümmel wrote:
Taking a look at the names of the frontends/qt4 files
-after all the renaiming- I'm a bit disappointed still
seeing Q* and QL* classes. Q* is the name of Trolltech
names, and we should not introduce our Q classes.
And why do we need QL? It's like QtBasedClassUsedInLyX*
but isn't this clear by the location of the file
lyx-project/.../trunk/src/frontends/qt4?
Are there plans to rename these files and classes too?
It seems NOW is the time to do it.
We all agree that this is bad naming. In 1.6, I plan (and Richard
offered me some help) to progressively migrate the dialogs to _my_ MVC
framework. But blindly removing QFoo to Foo will create file name clashes.
As written in my last mail this is not the case for all Q files.
So if you really want to proceed with the renaming, I suggest to rename
the files to FooWidget.
Or a other good name.
*Widget is not the worst, actually. But I think we are open for
proposals.
Some of them could be renamed to FooDialog, because in many cases we are
dealing with a dialog---and, indeed, QFooDialog was one of the files
that got merged. Maybe ones that don't go with dialogs could be renamed
in some similar way, to indicate what they do.
In short: If it's a widget, call it a FooWidget; if it's a dialog, call
it a FooDialog; if it's....
The ultimate goal in 1.6 is to convert all dialogs to straight widgets.
Then one dialog will be embedded either in a QDialog or a QDockWidget.
So I vote for Foo or FooWidget for all files.
Abdel.
