On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 09:57:31AM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi,
>
...
>
> That's my favourite. Its conventions might be different, given its age,
> but I think it's pretty consistent. Enthusiasm for anything other than
> trivial changes in style would soon wear thin if bugs were being
> introduced. And given the limited scope of the code base, is wrapping
> every man and his dog in a setter()/getter() really needed just because
> it seems the norm in the C++/Java world? (The code isn't really C++,
> more C with Classes.)
>
you may be right about setter()/getter() usage; other modifications would really
improve readability and maintainability:
- capitalization of class names
- a naming convention for class member variables
- reducing the number of global variables
- for each class a block of comments explaining what the class is all
about
> Cheers,
ulrich
--
-lauther
