Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > Just that gob wasn't half as ambitious as Vala. gob took some kind of > minimum effort approach which lead to the effect that you were mixing > high-level gob and low-level C code all the time. This just felt flaky > and hackish.
I used gob with gnome-games for a while (in exactly the same way that Vala is proposed for Seahorse, but I didn't ask before-hand). Then I stopped and converted the files back to ordinary C. The reason I did this was not because of gob's hackish nature - it still achieved its goal of being less work to write a gobject than plain C - but because of its obscurity. At the end of the day, expecting people to learn a new language just to contribute to the code-base was unreasonable. Vala's advantages over gob are two-fold: a) it looks even more like languages people are familiar with than gob does and b) it is being promoted more heavily than gob ever was. I hope it does succeed, and despite having a lot of sympathy for Bastien's wait-for-1.0 attitude, I think it should be tried sooner rather than later, otherwise it will suffer gob's fate. As an aside: ultimately it will be necessary to move it from a hacking dependency to a build dependency. Novice developers work from tarballs, not SVN and you will get patches against your generated code appearing in bugzilla. - Callum _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list