On Monday 10 March 2003 12:48 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:47:34PM +0000, Angus Leeming wrote: > > Ahhhh. I remember now. The bulk of the work is actually done in the > > _static_ methods params2string and string2params. If I did as you > > suggest, then I'd have to create a temporary MailInset just to extract > > the name. > > The name function could be static as well, couldn't it? > [I don't like static class function too much, either...]
No. MailInset uses name(), but different daughter classes have different names... > > Or hard code it of course. Do you have any preferences over leaving > > this name stuff as-is or having string literals in 3 places? > > Leave it as it is, we could have a look again later. Ok. I'll do the InsetBase* thing though. Angus
