On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Aaron J. Seigo <ase...@kde.org> wrote: > On Thursday, October 27, 2011 14:10:50 Craig Drummond wrote: >> > yes, it's an edge case for certain. would be nice if it works, all the >> > same. >> >> But, is it worth adding work-arounds for such an edge case? Why bloat the >> code with something that is unlikely to occur? At least I dont see it as a > > because ime: > > * covering edge cases often opens the door to fixing other similar cases later > on > > * it helps prevent code from becoming overly specified and brittle by only > doing the "main" things well > > * it gives people who try such things (out of innocence usually :) a really > good feeling that it actually works in all cases (as far as they know) > > counter points to this are: > > * it can lead the code to becoming spaghetti or a series of workarounds that > make it unmaintainable > > if that condition is met, ime, you can mostly forget about the positives. so > it does become a matter of judgement. in this case, i don't think it would be > a big addition, would be applicable to other similar cases and would make sure > the code itself was reasonably generic.
This may be an ignorant question, but what is wrong with using the existing application picker dialog as-is? As best as I can tell it already supports using commandline names, I am not 100% certain but it seems to create a .desktop file automatically when it cannot find a matching one. This would also make things easier if the application picker gets any improvements down the road. -Todd _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel