On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:42:44PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > The first option gives clean interfaces and a potential mess,
>
>
> > the second a messy interface but less chance of a mess.
> Doesn't this sound contradictory to you?
the second a messy interface but less chance of a mess on ei
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:08:26PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> Sorry, I didn't see this one. I saw only
>>
>> | The problem with this is that the BufferView is sometimes redone
>> | and you point to a non valid pointer (the problems we had
>> | especially in the beginnin
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:08:26PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't see this one. I saw only
>
> | The problem with this is that the BufferView is sometimes redone
> | and you point to a non valid pointer (the problems we had
> | especially in the beginning with InsetText after clean
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. C++ annotations is indeed very useful. I
> have a few other links, but I do not rememebr whether they come from
> the lyx docs:
>
> * http://cpptips.hyperformix.com/cpptips.html
>
> Some threads on the pitfalls of virtual inheritance
> htt
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:29:56PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> > Have you checked this work?
>> I have now.
>>
>> > If not one has probably derive "diamondlike"
>> Yes, that would work too.
>
> What about Juergen's "stability" argument, and handing over a
> BufferView *
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:29:56PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Have you checked this work?
> I have now.
>
> > If not one has probably derive "diamondlike"
> Yes, that would work too.
What about Juergen's "stability" argument, and handing over a BufferView *
in each call that might need it?
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Have you checked this work?
I have now.
> If not one has probably derive "diamondlike"
Yes, that would work too.
The code below is interesting in that Derived1 needs to explicitly
redefine data() or I get an error
cxx: Error: trial2.C, line 25: object of abstract class
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> But, as André points out, it might all be hot air. I should try
Angus> it out first.
Angus> Incidentally, I got all this from C++ Annotations (on our
Angus> recommended reading list) which is downloadable off the web and
Angus> is
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:54:15PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> * Does anyone have any experience with such a beast? * Are
> Angus> there any problems I should watch out for? * Is this a good
> Angus> thing to do?
>
> Can you tell me again what virtual inheritence of classes is?
cl
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> It seems to me that it would be apropriate to use multiple
> Angus> inheritance for insets that have a dialog. Attached is a
> sample Angus> piece of code that compiles but is otherwise untested.
>
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 02:47:07PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> * Does anyone have any experience with such a beast?
Limited.
> * Are there any problems I should watch out for?
Just make sure that enuough "virtuals" are in the code ;-)
> * Is this a good thing to do?
Looks sensible in this co
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> It seems to me that it would be apropriate to use multiple
Angus> inheritance for insets that have a dialog. Attached is a sample
Angus> piece of code that compiles but is otherwise untested.
Angus> * Does anyone have any experienc
It seems to me that it would be apropriate to use multiple
inheritance for insets that have a dialog. Attached is a sample piece
of code that compiles but is otherwise untested.
* Does anyone have any experience with such a beast?
* Are there any problems I should watch out for?
* Is this a goo
13 matches
Mail list logo
