Incoming Refactor #1618
Replies: 6 comments 9 replies
-
I vastly prefer the first of the two code samples |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I don't really have a strong preference for question 2, however is there is a large amount of things with the same prefix, the 2nd one would make more logical sense. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'd say the first one seems more natural |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
If there are a lot of classes related to Physics namespace, then I would take the second type of writing code. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For question 2 I'd say go with the 2nd and if people want the 1st they can use <Using> to alias it: <Using Include="Sandbox.Physics.World" Alias="PhysicsWorld" />
<Using Include="Sandbox.Physics.Body" Alias="PhysicsBody" />
<Using Include="Sandbox.Scene.Object" Alias="SceneObject" /> 1st would be bad as the inverse is not possible. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Second version, seems logical to split modules and all of what they have by namespaces. I would even prefer to have it |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm doing a big refactor of the physics and sceneobject APIs. This is going to be a breaking change and I'm going to make the game automatically hide older engine version games when I make it live.. so it'll be empty until people fix their addons and re-upload.
I did start doing this as a non breaking change, with lots of obsoletes. This would have worked fine, and I expect this to be one of the few
version++
refactors we see, but I decided that this is the time for the bold changes.Question 1
Are there any APIs that anyone can think of that could be cleaned up, or have been succeeded in some way and are now redundant?
Question 2
Which do you prefer?
or
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions