On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 13:11 +0200, Chris Kühl wrote: > One question I do have about style is what is the preferred file nameing > scheme. Some are in module-class-name form, others in module-ClassName > form, and still others in ClassName form. I'll be happy to make my new > files reflect the desired scheme.
I forgot to answer this. I don't have a strong opinion about this. I'm not a fan of the "one class per file" paradigm. IMHO it leads to a needless proliferation of files. I prefer to group related classes in a single header and implementation file. On the other hand, it is more obvious where code is to be found when the file name is the same as the class name, once one knows the class name. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
