[geos-devel] File names

[Mateusz Łoskot]

Paul Ramsey wrote:
> Change for changes sake? :)

I think it's a good time to make big changes, but necessary for easier
maintenance in future.

Why?
- GEOS 3.0.0 will very likely break backward compatibility regarding
C++ API
- currently, strk commits pretty big changes
- currently, GEOS source code is being refactored seriously
- GEOS 3.0.0 is not released yet, so changes are possible
- it's better to release big amount of changes at once than release
them in smaller chuncks in time. Especially that every such chunk is
going to break backward compatibility, so there is no difference for
users: once or in pieces, but once sounds better for developers ;-)

> We could lint all the files too, while we are at it :)

You have my vote.
I've also called to build GEOS with -ansi and -pedantic switches of
GCC on.
Currently, I have to work using VC++ 8.0 because company I work for
(Taxus SI Ltd.) is going to use GEOS on Windows.
So, I'm trying to help strk in refactoring and bug fixing job to get
stable GEOS as fast as possible.
And latest VC++ 8.0 seems to be quite more restrictive about ISO C++ by
default than GCC. Example: strk repored he does not get much warnings
with -Wall switch on, but I get about 500 warnings using /W3 (from /W1
to /W4) flag. Every warning is a potential bug, obviously.

So, I think lint would help us much to find potentially unsafe
constructions.

The same about Unit Tests. I started to incorporated Boost UTF library.
I hope I'll finish JTS unit tests ported to C++/Boost UTF this weekend.
They are extremely helpful.
Why?
After I created two very simple tests: for Envelope class and for
CGAlgorithms I found unsafe code and - before an hour - serious memory
leaks (already fixed and I'll send patch tonight).
I have not to do anything more than just run those two tests and analyze
output :-)
So, I put big hope in those test to help us much.

> I'll bow to the will of the developers though...

Me to. I'm not a GEOS developer but just a freelance contributor so my
word certainly may be not taken under consideration and no problem about
that. But I hope I'm doing nothing wrong with sharing my opinion and
trigger a little dicussion :-)))

 > this is something
> best done at the archive level, I believe, since we are in CVS not 
> SVN. Hey, speaking of disruptive change, how about an SVN archive :)

I'd love to see GEOS controlled by SVN.
You have my vote!

Cheers
-- 
Mateusz Łoskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net