On Thursday 04 November 2010 09:40:40 ext Nicolas Arnaud-Cormos wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose a community effort to enhance the API of Qt Creator. > I can see several areas where the community can help Nokia developers. > > Coding style > ======== > I was a little frustrated with my first big merge request, when I had to make > all those little changes to follow the coding style, whereas the existing > code > is not following it: > * use of m_ for class members > * use of d-pointer for exported classes > * use class instead of struct > > I can also see some inconsistency, I'm sure I can find 5 different way to > create > a d-pointer (private class inside the class, private class outside, append > Private to the class name, just Private, struct, class...).
Even for such a "young" project there are sometimes historical reasons why some included code does not follow conventions, like because it was written in other contexts. We traditionally used the comparatively loose Qt coding guidelines for new code (which is barely followed inside Qt btw) and tightened them up a bit, and use this at least for new code. Purely cosmetic changes just for the sake of it were discouraged, partially with good reasoning like to not clutter the history. Some of the these concerns are not valid anymore (annotating the parent change is only one mouse click away nowadays) some were never valid from the beginning, so the main reason for not doing it is (from my point of view) that just nobody spend time on it. I guess we could really "fork" the Qt coding guidelines and put the few more items in that we think would make sense. In some cases there might be even some fight on what the rules should look like or whether there should be rules. Line lengths come to mind... Andre' _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@trolltech.com http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
