On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 01:16:02PM +0100, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > This is neat.
It's a lot neater now. > I looked at the patch, and can see that there still is a long way > to go, but I'm impressed that you got as far as you have. Actually there is not so far now, really. And if I got so far as I have, it is by standing on the shoulders of Asgers (or something) ... > If I have to critique the work, I can only talk about the naming > because I have not tried it. Regarding the naming, I support Juergen's > comments about LyXScreen or Screen rather than LScreen. hey I'm not too picky, Screen works for me. > Regarding the Painter, I think it's ok to call the base just Painter, > but PainterBase works as well. calling it PainterBase would mean having to change everywhere in the core to use PainterBase & not Painter &. So I went for least resistance :) > However, it sounds like XPainter could > use a better name. Like ? > Also, I think you used "QPainter". Why not use "QtPainter"? Actually QPainter is a Qt class. I used QLPainter, probably QtPainter is better indeed regards john -- I am a complete moron for forgetting about endianness. May I be forever marked as such.
