Conversation started Feb 11, 2015 at 15:22.
Duga
Duga
Feb 11, 2015 15:22
[retailcoder/Rubberduck] retailcoder commented on issue #192: Should Rubberduck.Reflection be allowed to emit VBA code?
> You're right, hadn't realized `Extension` and `DockableWindowHost` were now `_Extension` and `_DockableWindowHost` - no need for a `Rubberduck.Core` then!

But I don't see a reason why VBIDE extensions and/or parser stuff would need to be part of `Rubberduck.Reflection`, it seems completely backwards to me; they *are* at the heart of Rubberduck and completely belong with the "Core" stuff. If `Reflection` needs it, it can just use them... if `Rubberduck.Reflection` references `Rubberduck` :)
Mat's Mug
Mat's Mug
oh I see what you mean
but INode is not really part of the parser stuff
the COM interfaces for that don't need to be in the core lib
RubberDuck
RubberDuck
> Then I would make it a completely separate assembly/.tlb, so users can't inadvertantly enable the reflection API, and IT departments can deem it "unsafe" without ruining all of Rubberduck.
That's ^ what I'm basing this off of @Mat'sMug.
Mat's Mug
Mat's Mug
INode/parsing isn't dangerous. Emitting code can be.
RubberDuck
RubberDuck
But there's no reason for them not to be if we're not worried about enabling reflection.
Personally, I wouldn't split any of it unless there's a really good reason.
So, admitedly, the VBIDE is dangerous. So, if that's what we're worried about, then we need an Rubberduck.Extensibility assembly.
"Core" (not really a core) would reference it for what it needs.
Mat's Mug
Mat's Mug
hmm
I think I like this more than I care to admit.
yeah, Rubberduck.Extensibility makes sense, with all the VBIDE stuff wrapped up.
Then Rubberduck references it, and Rubberduck.Reflection references both Rubberduck and Rubberduck.Extensibility
RubberDuck
RubberDuck
Feb 11, 2015 15:33
@Mat'sMug Does Reflection really need it's own assembly? I mean, I don't care if it does. I'm just curious what all you plan on putting in there.
Mat's Mug
Mat's Mug
@RubberDuck the screenshot I took was with the toolbar floating - that one is docked onto the toolbar area.. it's the same toolbar though ;)
RubberDuck
RubberDuck
If it's a whole collection of classes, then it may make sense.
 
Conversation ended Feb 11, 2015 at 15:34.