[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [IMP-dev] Directory structure

On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:18 AM, Ben Webb wrote:


Daniel Russel wrote:

Given the shift to modules, it is not clear that the original include
directory structure is the best any more (with IMP/restraints holding
restraints, for example). I would propose that all public classes/
functions in the modules API be in headers in the module main include
directory.

Sure, why not? It doesn't really make a whole lot of difference either
way - the only reason to have a non-flat directory structure is to make 
things easier to look at with 'ls' (the structure has no influence on
the way modules are linked).
For me, I almost never do ls as opposed to type part of the name and hit tab to list matching names (which is easier with one directory). 
I guess the other reason was to avoid conflicts with the SConscript  
files. But since things can be checked in directly, that shouldn't be  
a problem any more (and if the files aren't listed on separate lines  
in the SConscripts, they soon will be, further making conflicts less  
likely :-)