Am Montag, 5. Juni 2006 13:50 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes: > Except for the crash on exit problem, could you confirm me that the > clipboard functionality remains the same for linux/X11/qt3/xforms/gtk?
I did not try, and would rather not like to test this obsolete patch further, but a future one that has the remaining problems solved. If you have a clear idea how it should look like I don't see any reason why it could nto be made work on all frontends. > Of course this means that I will remove WorkAreaFactory and > LyXScreenFactory. The frontends would be responsible for the object > creations and destructions so there would be no need anymore for scoped_ptr. > > Can I work on this? As in "Would it be accepted?" This is again something I don't care too much, but I think it will be accepted if you either do the changes in all frontends or give clear instructions what needs to be done. > >> Index: src/frontends/qt4/LyxClipboard.C > > > > Should be named LyXClipboard.C > > Well I don't like much this prefix and I was thinking of going back to > my initial thought and use the same naming: My point is that if you use the prefix it should be LyX. > frontend/Clipboard.h will be in the lyx namespace. > frontend/qt3/Clipboard.[Ch] > frontend/qt4/Clipboard.[Ch] > frontend/gtk/Clipboard.[Ch] > frontend/xforms/Clipboard.[Ch] will be in the lyx::frontend namespace > > Are they any strong opinion against that? If any I could use the "Base" > prefix in the virtual base class instead: > > frontend/BaseClipboard.h > frontend/BaseWorkArea.h > frontend/BaseScreen.h > frontend/[qt3,qt4,gtk,xforms]/Clipboard.[Ch] > frontend/[qt3,qt4,gtk,xforms]/WorkArea.[Ch] > frontend/[qt3,qt4,gtk,xforms]/Screen.[Ch] > > Comments, opinion? Both variants would be fine with me. > I agree that multiple inheritance of non base classes should be avoided. > But, in my opinion, polymorphism thanks to inheritance of multiple base > virtual classes is a very nice concept that should be used. This makes sense e.g. for QWorkArea that is both a QWidget and a Workarea, but adding Clipboard to that is IMO a hack that should be avoided. > The idea is that if needed, the new Clipboard class could retrieve the > work_area pointer from the main frontend class (as defined above). How would it work with multiple work areas? If you have an idea how to do that then it is fine with me. > I think stagnation is bad. I think that my proposal would ease the path > to multiple workAreas in the future. So, would you like me to work on > that or no? As I already wrote: I don't see the urgent need to do this cleanup. I can see long term improvements, and if you are going to do that then I want to have a result that is better than what we have now. That means: Don't trade one hack (e.g. clipboard in WorkArea) for a new one (e.g. XWorkarea == XClipboard). Georg
