Automatically call member functions from static functions. #6
Conversation
This provides concise access to local data in implementations.
umm.. "slight" is an under statement to say the least - I cant see this being accepted (screeds of changes dont qualify as "slight"). At least seperate the (This is a common reason why most projects reject patches, because for some reason "newbie dev's" think its OK to perform "re-factor" as part of applying their intended patch - it will always get rejected.) NOTE: it is not something you should be ashamed of, we have all done it at least once. Always adapt your coding style to the project. Submitting a (seperate) "formatting re-factor" is acceptable, but could also be a "touchy subject" for some projects, as this sort of "re-factor" is prone to an indivuals prefered style asthetic. |
|
Paul, this project is only one class large and has only 33 commits. What are you talking about? |
|
There is a static function for every member function. Automatically calling them means touching the entire implementation, and becomes a refactor. Did you make this pull request comment with an automated system? |
|
Apologies for my curt and rude reply. I was really tired. I am still curious if you use ai augmentation to make github comments. It's hard to find Fuse++ implementations to add work to. |
This provides concise access to local data in implementations.
A slight refactor to improve ease of use a little.