On 6/28/2016 3:55 PM, Simon Richter wrote: > Hi, > > On 28.06.2016 21:30, Michael Steinberg wrote: > >> Now I only need to know how I should go about your concerns. Maybe using >> something along the lines of >> >> using WX_CONFIG_PTR = std::unique_ptr< wxConfigBase >; > > No, that isn't readable either, because it doesn't communicate the > semantics. > > The full smart pointer template name is IMO the best choice here -- it > makes clear that the current context takes and keeps ownership of > whatever that function returns. It is not too ugly to read, and it makes > the intention clear.
This is my preference. > > "auto" is useful in places where the type does not matter, or cannot be > described, for example in a lambda, or when working with iterators: > > auto less = [](int lhs, int rhs) -> bool { return lhs < rhs; }; > > auto i = mymap.find("foo"); > if( i == mymap.end() ) ... > >> A sidenote: if I find myself working on some parts of the code, are >> there objections if I silently add "override" specifiers in related >> code? > > I have patches that add "virtual" and "override" to all overrides. So > far, these haven't been committed. They are on my todo list but if I could get some help with testing on different compilers (preferably older gcc 4.8ish compilers which are still in use in a lot of stable environments) and different platforms, that would be helpful. > >> I find these help a lot. > > Indeed, especially "virtual". > > Simon > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp