Subject: refactoring AP_*Frame (was Re: NO consensus!)
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Wed Apr 25 2001 - 20:42:15 CDT
At 11:30 PM 4/23/01 +0200, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
>On dimanche, avril 22, 2001, at 04:44 , Dom Lachowicz wrote:
>> Also, much of the "duplicated code" that you mention comes from a fast
>> growing of Abi. A lot of things need to be refactored. Lots of methods
>> in the AP_*Frame class, for example, are just cut-and-paste from one to
>> another.
>
>Vote +10
>
>I'm willing to help on this, but we need to break the tree for that.
>Seriously.
I'm curious. If it's "just" a bunch of cut-and-paste code, why would we
need to break the tree to get it refactored? In theory, it should be safe
to replace the N duplicate references with the relevant XP call, no?
Paul,
who's never opposed to some judicious refactoring
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Apr 25 2001 - 20:34:38 CDT