On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 00:59, Paul Ishenin <[email protected]> wrote: > 22.01.2010 21:07, Alexander Klenin wrote: >> At the current stage, I simply re-export TPropertyEditHook >> from propedits unit. >> Theoretically, after updating all dependent units >> this re-export might be removed, but there is no pressure -- >> it is only a single line and can be postponed indefinitely. > > Refactoring should not be the final goal. Refactoring usually used when > something fit bad into the existing design.
That is one possible reason. The other reason (which was the actual reason I undertook the refactoring) is that, at least for me, there is a certain threshold of ugliness after which I am just unable to unravel the current design and understand it enough to make a needed change, even if the design itself can accommodate it. This property is often called 'unmaintainability'. Of course, the threshold is different for different people, but I consider 6000 LOC in a singe unit to be far beyond any reasonable level. > As Mattias I don't see the big > need to extract all the propedit internals to other units - it will > complicate the use of IDEIntf for other developers. Hm. Are you sure of that? I am, in a sense, "other developer", because I tried to use IDEIntf to implement custom editor for TAChart, and I specifically wanted to make PropEdits easier to understand and use. So, why do you think proper layer separation will make the PropEdits harder to use? > Although some non-related to property editors code can be moved away. Yes, I started this with PropEditUtils extraction, but there is more to do in this direction. -- Alexander S. Klenin -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
