On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:44:28PM +0100, Bernard Hurley wrote: > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:14:37PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: <gra...@percival-music.ca> > >> lily/output-def.cc:38: Real long_name_len = 0.0; > >> could these be class member variables instead of global variables? > > > > I don't believe so. I'd be happy to be corrected by someone who > > understands this better than I do, but my understanding of c++ (which I > > guess at based on c#) says that, in order to access a class member > > variable, you need to have an instantiation of the class.
That is true. > In C++ variables can be declared static. If this is done all instances of > the class share the same instance of the variable and it can exist > even if the class has no instances see: Yes, that's also true. Let me rephrase my concern: in C++-land, having a global variable (including static variables) are viewed upon like picking one's nose. If there is absolutely no other way to achieve one's goal, it could be tolerated. But I would be very surprised if this could not be implemented without global variables, so I think another draft of the patch will be necessary. Hopefully somebody familiar with lilypond internals can skim the patch (it's quite small) and give a suggestion as to how to avoid the global variables. - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
