Pimpl-ization

[Miklos Vajna]

Hi Kohei,

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 09:09:04PM -0500, Kohei Yoshida <kohei.yoshida at collabora.com> wrote:
> 1) To reduce the size of our shared objects.
> 2) To improve our build time.
> 
> 1) is apparently important for Michael Stahl, and I personally care
> about 2) since it directly affects my development efficiency.
> 
> My belief was that this was not a controvercial change, but it appears
> that it is.  If there is a strong objection I'll stop doing it.  If not,
> I'd like to continue pursing this since it seems to improve both of the
> 2 aforementioned points, and I've only covered perhaps 10-20% of all
> possible candidates.
> 
> Please share your opinions.

I very much appreciate the work you do here, if regular developers
ignore the build time issues with buying faster and faster HW, then at
some point we won't be able to attract new contributors.

I know that some feel this makes debugging harder, as printing the
object will now show only a pImpl pointer and not the data members, but
then gdb can call method calls just fine, so calling the relevant
members isn't that hard, IMHO. (Or if it's a frequently used object, a
pretty-printer can be added.)

Thanks,

Miklos
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/attachments/20141211/bc0805fa/attachment.sig>