2015-07-04 13:11 GMT+03:00 Boudhayan Gupta <m...@baloneygeek.com>: >> [1] http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/262020 >> [2] http://stackoverflow.com/a/15420950 > > I'd seen both of these topics before. I'd obviously use minimal > headers in libraries and other projects where the headers could be > used by the public to build their own software, since cumulative > headers pull in headers that might be completely unnecessary to the > aforesaid software. > > However here, where all headers are private, it makes much more sense > from an organization point of view to have cumulative headers, at > least for me.
Boudhayan, It doesn't seem right to apply different rules to headers that are exported and not exported. Are you going to rewrite the includes if/when the class ImageGrabber becomes a public library? (E.g. when someone wants to incorporate a screen grabber into his application.) You said "I can see exactly which components a single cpp file depends on my looking at the headers". If you follow the recommendation in the links [1,2], all the dependent components will be included in the .cpp file, so you can see exactly what you want there. Any other issue with it? And finally, why using distinct coding style while there's established Kdelibs coding style? Is your coding style documented somewhere? If not, then I'm sure KSG will become a mix of different coding styles in a while because people don't know what coding style to follow. -- Alexander Potashev
