kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Seth Hillbrand <seth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

A specification for substantial changes like this should document 
clearly the hierarchy of inheritance, each class's functions and 
expected returns.  There are some very good references out there on how 
to write specs [1][2][3].

This is not to dismiss Reece's suggestion.  I think it is a good one and 
potentially quite beneficial long-term.  I also think Reece is 
approaching this the right way by writing a short e-mail to the list 
first before pouring effort into the spec.  I'm not quite certain 
whether Reece is suggesting that he'd like to make this change or 
whether it is being proposed as a wishlist item for future work.  If it 
is the former, it needs a spec.  If it is the latter, we can do that 
when it is on someone's to-do list.

Best-
Seth

[1] 
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/10/02/painless-functional-specifications-part-1-why-bother/
[2] 
https://books.google.com/books/about/Specification_by_Example.html?id=5F5PYgEACAAJ
[3] https://codeburst.io/on-writing-tech-specs-6404c9791159

On 2019-06-22 21:37, hauptmech wrote:
> Isn't Reece's original post the spec? In summary, the name VECTOR is
> confusing and the type structure could be expanded on to offer more
> compile time checks. He proposes a KiPoint and KiDelta, and describes
> their behavior clearly enough for anyone that does geometry
> calculations. What's missing from the spec?
>
>
>
> On 23/06/2019 2:52 AM, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> > On 2019-06-21 22:54, Reece R. Pollack wrote:
> > > Doing this now, before we go too far down the path of replacing
> > > wxWidgets types with non-OOB arrays would enhance readability and 
> > > make
> > > the code more robust. Using VECTOR2I is going the wrong way.
> >
> > Hi Reece-
> >
> > Codebase cleaning like you suggest can go a long way toward improving 
> > sustainability and readability.  But done the wrong way, it will have 
> > the opposite effect as we fight with return types that aren't fully 
> > matched.
> >
> > Before we decide to do this type of deep plumbing on the KiCad 
> > innards, I'd love to see the proposed specification for what's being 
> > implemented.  Otherwise, this'll be a bike shedding discussion.
> >
> > -S
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp