On 14 Dec 2012, at 16:09, Torsten Dreyer wrote: > As I do not have the time to proof you wrong, you deserve the chance to > proof me wrong! I'll shut up now and stop objecting against merging your > code. I won't be able to merge it myself before we enter the feature > freeze but probably someone with commit rights takes care of it.
However I still have code quality objections, unrelated to the performance of the code! (And also unrelated to the accuracy of the simulation - I have no problem with adding advanced computational systems so long as their optional, which this is) I will take a look next week at merging the changes locally and then seeing how much re-structuring is needed to make me comfortable, but right now the lack of object-orientated design and over/mis-use of properties is just not something I want to add more of, to the codebase. As I said to Adrian offline, I know there's plenty of code already checked in, of a similar quality / design / pattern to his submission, but I'd like to set a higher standard for new code than what we had previously. James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
