On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 10:59:23PM +0200, Ilja Booij wrote: > On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:40:46 -0400, Dan Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 09:46:22AM +0200, Paul J Stevens wrote: > > > > > > I think you misunderstand. Simplification of the code is primary. Doing so > > > requires getting rid of large parts of the code. I'm currently removing > > > all > > > list code (he leif) and replace it with glist where necessary. I'm also > > > removing all cache code, and I'm replacing all mimeparsing with gmime. > > > However, since I'm learning about gmime and glib as I go along, it's much > > > easier to develop all this new code in a stand alone situation where I > > > don't have to fireup the daemons sprinkled with trace and sleep calls, > > > connect a gdb to the sleeping process, set breakpoints, etc.... > > > > > Glib disgusts me. Although I beleive in outsourcing code to other programs, > > glib is horrible partly due to the fact that its another monolithic bloated > > library. What benefits are you getting by adding another dependency vs. > > using the existing mime parsing. > > Glib is a great library. You've mentioned that you don't like it a > couple of times. Obviously you haven't mentioned anything that made > someone decide we shouldn't need it. Glib is all about the idea of OOP in C. Its very bloated, and is worse than C++. .. > > What we gain by using GLib is the ability to get rid of some code that > is unmaintainable as it is. We get the ability to use GMime. GLib is > supported on many platforms. > Well that may be a benefit, have you looked into libmailutils. Its a library for the sole purpose of mail related tasks. It was written for mailutils which provides its own imap and pop3, tho, libmailutils can be seperated. > I just do *not* see the problems you have with it. Please enlighten me. > > Ilja
Dan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
