Re: [DM-dev] New Release

[stephan b. <st...@s1...>]

On Friday 09 December 2005 00:17, Aaron Dalton wrote:
> Yeah, I'm not sure how I'll organize CVS, but we'll work it out =3D)=20

If i may say so, i've got a lot of experience structuring C++ source=20
trees, and a &h!t load of opinions on the topic ;).

The current tree is really flat, i'd like to see it separated like so:

src/
src/dm =3D core lib code. name needn't be 'dm'
src/ui or src/dm/ui =3D UI-centric lib code.
src/client =3D client app(s) go here. e.g.
	src/client/console
	src/client/sdl
	src/client/example
include/sf.net/dm2

The includes can live under src/dm, but should be copied/symlinked under=20
include/... during the build process. Another alternative is to move=20
the headers under include/... The sources should only reference the=20
headers using <sf.net/dm2/foo.hpp>, rather than "foo.hpp", IMO.

This general structure has shown to be very extendable as a project=20
grows. The headers conventions also enforce non-circular dependencies=20
in the various subcomponents. If the copy/symlink approach is used,=20
cyclic deps become impossible because they'll break the first time the=20
tree is built (before all headers are installed under include/...).

i've got lots more to say on build trees, but i'll shut up :).

=2D-=20
=2D---- st...@s1...   http://s11n.net
"...pleasure is a grace and is not obedient to the commands
of the will." -- Alan W. Watts