kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Lorenzo Marcantonio <l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Why reinventing the wheel? AFAIK C++ has a pretty good RTTI...
Doing it by hand seems to me quite error prone and distracting (and
I don't want to know what happens when subclassing). Had to do that in
the old borland C++ days (no templates, Borland intrusive containers),
didn't like it:D

In fact good design practices (at least in OO) would condemn the whole
KICAD_T enum :P

I think that instead of using such kind of expedient better (virtual)
interfaces (in the java sense, pure abstracts to be implemented) should
be designed with a refactoring.

That is, if you want to use C++ in the OO way (in imperative style I'd
simply have checked the type member, without all that template fluff).

I guess it's made for performance reason; in the past I actually checked
the dynamic_cast implementation and it involves a call and some
traversing; probably that's inevitable for supporting correctly the mess
of inheritance supported by C++. Given the templating of both dyn_cast
and ClassOf, code would be pretty tight; too bad it's horrible to write
and read:P

My opinion, of course (and as you know I'm not exactly a fan of OOP :D).
(yes, it would break the routines and split them all over the singular
object and you'll take forever to follow the flow; one of the reasons for
me not liking OO)

-- 
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl