This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: a bit of rearranging?
- From: Nathan Myers <ncm-nospam at cantrip dot org>
- To: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 02:32:09 +0000
- Subject: Re: a bit of rearranging?
- References: <20020515181926.A3408@disaster.basement.lan>
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 06:19:26PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
> Would anybody mind if I rearranged the order of some of the member functions
> so that 1) they're in more or less the same order in both classes, and 2)
> they're in more or less the same order as described in 14882? I don't
> how much time you spend reading the guts of these files, and didn't want
> to mess up anybody's scheme. Right now I'm jumping all over the place...
If every time you touched a class definition, you re-arranged it to
match as closely as possible the ordering
typedefs
public constructors and destructor
public member functions
protected constructors
protected member functions
overriding virtuals
friend declarations.
private member functions
private member data
you would be improving the library each time.
Before you do, you might announce it for a particular header
file, but usually people do not make many changes in visible
class definitions, so checkin conflicts are unlikely.
Nathan Myers
ncm at cantrip dot org