Re: Issue 4564: make Grob an abstract class (issue 260810043 by address@hidden)

[hanwenn]

On 2015/08/28 15:17:10, hanwenn wrote:
> On 2015/08/26 21:18:49, Dan Eble wrote:
> > On 2015/08/26 11:26:56, hanwenn wrote:
> >
> > > "preparation of .. " : deriving from Grob is not a feature but a
risk. In
> > fact,
> > > it would even be nice if Item and Spanner could disappear, but
that seems to
> > be
> > > intractable.
> > >
> > > I spent a giant amount of energy distangling formatting logic from
C++ type
> > > hierarchy, so behaviors can be mixed and matched at runtime, and
this is
> > taking
> > > a step in the opposite direction.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback.  David had the same concern about the
rationale in
> the
> > review comment but accepted the change to the code apart from it.
Will you
> also
> > be content if I limit the rationale in the commit message to the
fact that
> > nobody currently instantiates a base Grob?

> Yes, please chnage the commit message. Also, you might want to make
sure that
> the rationale is properly documented.

(but use a different CL for that.)


https://codereview.appspot.com/260810043/