I think that's a good idea too. - Timeless Prototype
On 09/07/06, Jesse Nesbitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I like it. This seems like a smart idea, and AFAIK VS (2005 atleast) will refactor it quickly and painlessly. We could use a bit of abstraction and modularization in the library. --Jesse On 7/8/06, Static Sprocket <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Had a bit of a discussion today with John H about how to make it a > little easier to maintain and develop the code tree for libsecondlife. > One of the bottlenecks and merging choke points has been the > PacketHelper.cs file. > > This file would, as it currently stands, eventually have over 500+ > static functions in it, and would require near constant merging as we > continue to develop libsecondlife. > > My proposal is to go ahead and break up PacketHelpers.cs into seperate > class files, with each file containing a class with static functions > for one category or area of Second Life. > > So we would have a libsecondlife.PacketHelpers namespace, with > seperate classes for Avatar, Inventory, Messaging, Network/System, > etc: > > libsecondlife.PacketHelpers.Inventory > libsecondlife.PacketHelpers.Avatar > libsecondlife.PacketHelpers.Messaging // Chat and IM > libsecondlife.PacketHelpers.NetworkPackets > > > This will allow the developer(s) working on Messaging to make changes > without having to worry about merging their changes with the > developer(s) working on Avatar movement, or Inventory Management. > > Any thoughts or problems with using this structure? > > _______________________________________________ > libsecondlife-dev mailing list > libsecondlife-dev@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev > -- --Jesse _______________________________________________ libsecondlife-dev mailing list libsecondlife-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev
_______________________________________________ libsecondlife-dev mailing list libsecondlife-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev
