Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] [PRE-PATCH] private struct _GmTextChat

On lun, 2004-01-26 at 11:32, Craig Southeren wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:09:05 +0100
> PUYDT Julien <julien puydt laposte net> wrote:
> ..deleted
> > But notice that doing a:
> > chat = new thingie ();
> > then later on:
> > oh_please_init_that (chat);
> > is dirty! It really should be:
> > chat = get_me_a_new_one_please_thanks ();
> I disagree. 
> There are often good reasons why it is necessary to create the object,
> and then initialise it explicitly, because there are significant
> limitations on what can be done in a C++ constructor. I am not sure if
> these apply in this case, but it worth realising that this may true.

In this case, it is a simple struct, that even has a private part that
can't be initialized by the part of the code that does the new!

But your remark is good: it's probably better to keep it like this, and
the next version of that patch won't touch that.

> > That's the reason I prefer going through the ml than having a cvs
> > account ;-)

> You (or anyone else) should seriously consider accepting CVS write
> privileges if Damien offers them to you, as that means he has considered
> that you are good enough to be a serious contributor to the project. By
> taking on this responsibility, you free up Damien to do other stuff that
> only he can do, like coding new features or dealing with other questions.
> Yes, that may mean more work for you and more responsibility for you,
> and it may also mean that sometimes you will get something wrong and
> people will say nasty things about you, but that may be the price of
> helping GM to advance more quickly.

Well, I'm not a regular contributor yet, and my gtk skills are quite
limited (still it seems the regex in text-chat works! ;-)). I prefer
waiting a little and gain some confidence before I use a write access...


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]