Re: setup.exe - RFC: reorganizing source into category directories

["Max Bowsher" <maxb at ukf dot net>]

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Max Bowsher wrote:
>
> > Setup.exe has a *lot* of source files.
> >
> > To make the source a little more comprehendable, I'm planning on moving
> > certain subsystems which effectively are utility libraries in their own 
> > right
> > into subdirectories.
> >
> > This should hopefully be a step on the path to untangling the logic and 
> > the
> > GUI code.
> >
> > To begin with, I'm proposing the following new directories:
> >
> > One for all source imported with little or no modification from external
> > sources - that is md5.* (from libmd5-rfc sourceforge project) and 
> > rfc1738.*
> > (from squid). A possible name for this would be "srclib".
>
> I assume you plan to build those into a library and link with it later?
> How about naming the directory after the library (e.g., "librfc" or
> something)?

No. I don't think it's worth it - there is only one object for the md5 code, 
and one object for the rfc1738 code. Despite the incidental presence of rfc 
in both of the names, they are entirely unrelated, so I don't think it would 
be correct to bundle them together.

> > One for NetIO and io_stream class heirarchies, and geturl.* (associated
> > helper functions). This is a large (116KB) chunk of code, exclusively
> > concerned with IO. A possible name for this would be "cygsuio".
>
> Again, "libio"?

A rather too-generic name for some rather specific code, IMO.
This one would make sense as a library eventually, once I've picked out all 
the usages of global variables from the main setup code.

> > One for all image files (icon, bitmaps). Name "images".
>
> Would it make sense to move res.rc and resource.h in there as well and
> call the directory "resources" or "libresource"?

I like that idea - I'd pick the name "resources".

Max.