On Friday, June 10, 2011 20:24:08 PM Pierre wrote: > On Friday 10 June 2011 12:49:18 Jos van den Oever wrote: > > On Friday, June 10, 2011 08:22:04 AM Jos van den Oever wrote: > > > Can you think of a reason why this would not work? > > > > I can now. The circular nature of element nesting make is harder to > > create these classes. E.g. office:document can have (at some depth) a > > "office:image" which can have an "office:document" inside. > > > > Who can think of an elegant solution for this? > > > > Find my first attempt attached. > > > > Cheers, > > Jos > > I can't see that as a problem, with a good class definition... > What is the problem exactly ?
I had code like this:
class B;
public:
class A {
B startB();
};
class B {
public:
A startA();
};
which is not possible. I changed it now to
class B;
class A {
public:
A(const B&);
};
class B {
B(const A&);
};
which does work. The current header file is nearly a megabyte, but compiles
down to nearly no code if you do not use much, in my current version which
adds 'inline' to each function.
Cheers,
Jos
--
Jos van den Oever, software architect
+49 391 25 19 15 53
074 3491911
http://kogmbh.com/legal/
odf.h.bz2
Description: application/bzip
_______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
