On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 10:52 -0500, Yu Feng wrote: > Therefore my opinion on the cycles is that there should not be > unsolvable typedef cycles ( with .h, -priv.h and .c) in a properly > designed program, because these cycles represents solid cycles in your > Class atlas; which (as I can remember) should be avoided as possible. If > one is detected, VALA should throw an error -- even if vala can handle > it; it should throw an warning for this poor design.
While some cycles between classes may be a sign of poor design, this is certainly not always the case. You often have loosely coupled components (usually no cycle) but a few strongly coupled classes per component (can contain a cycle) in well designed libraries. We should really try to help the developer here. I don't think that possible C header cycles are a good indication for the quality of a library. Jürg _______________________________________________ Vala-list mailing list Vala-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
