Doug Turner wrote:
> Don't worry too much about where it belongs in xpcom, that will
> come during the implemention.
I was wondering about something related to this recently. Where should
things be?
More specifically, I feel that the interfaces and the components
implementing them don't necessarily go together, especially for an
interface that might have one specific implementation.
One could say that it should go in the package that defines it, but
wouldn't it be better if we had a flatter interface landscape by putting
everything in the XPCOM module? Or at least, some things. Maybe we
should make a distinction between module-defined interfaces and
"well-known" interfaces?
I'm not saying that this is what should be done, just that when looking
for the right place, we shouldn't assume that the interface and
implementing component automatically go together.
Just making my idea known, what do you think?
--
"How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers are for.
I only coded it." -- Linus Torvalds
