Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 11:29:56AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> > Or lyx::global::updateInset(this) ;-)
>> > [Which suspiciously feels like using 'current_view' *cough*]
>> But isn't...
>
| I know.
>
>> Hmmm, so you're suggesting a bunch of free functions which provide a
>> world-visble interface to class LyX's member variables, this class
>> itself being hidden away in the .C file.
>
| Yes.
>
>> I can see it is possible. Why is it 'preferable'?
>
| Free functions provide (often...) better encapsulation (Scott Meyers?).
>
| Have a look at the resulting .h files in both cases.
| Which one is slimmer?
But when comparing APIs you have to take the free functions into
account. So the functions API does not get slimmer, but you get less
dependencies and better encapsulation.
--
Lgb
