Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 11/12/2011 12:43 PM, Michael Meeks wrote:
        It seems a nonsense to me to not ship the pre-built C++ headers in the
sdk - particularly if that would make things easier for developers.

        Stephan - is there a really good reason for not doing that ? clearly
the easier we make the sdk to use the better, and those headers can be
cut/pasted around / included into the code without problems surely.

No fundamental reason not to. Probably more directed by the rationale to not ship what is easily (for whatever definition of "easily") generated. And I gather that if you use the SDK in the "intended" way, the included makefiles take care of header generation just fine. (I do not argue that the way the SDK was designed to be used is necessarily useful, however.) Plus, as soon as you want to introduce your own UNOIDL constructs, you need to use cppumaker etc. anyway.

Feel free to go ahead, I would say.

Stephan

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.