On 13-11-15 07:02 AM, Colomban Wendling wrote:
Le 15/11/2013 04:19, Matthew Brush a écrit :
On 13-11-14 10:56 AM, Dimitar Zhekov wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:47:26 -0800
Matthew Brush <mbr...@codebrainz.ca> wrote:
On 13-11-12 10:43 AM, Dimitar Zhekov wrote:
On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 01:31:35 -0800
Matthew Brush <mbr...@codebrainz.ca> wrote:
1. An architecture that allows multi-threading to be used for non-GUI
tasks.
Another (perhaps more obvious) candidate here is file loading/saving,
which is *way* easier than the parsing stuff since [...] and because
Scintilla and GIO make this quite easy (probably wouldn't even require
threads but just mainloop/async stuff).
We don't even have a proper saving with all GIO/GFile/whatever levels,
because some people haven't completed even one level properly.
I didn't understand what this means?
We have several options to save a file in different ways, because all
GLib stuff is either unreliable or has side effenct (owner and
permissions change).
So fix GLib instead of adding a bunch of different workarounds to Geany.
Geany's code isn't the place to work around bugs in the *open source*,
supposedly cross-platform toolkit we use, it completely defeats the
purpose of using such a library in the first place. If we can fix it
Geany, we can just as easily contribute the fixes to GLib instead. If
the fixes are too hackish or not good enough to be accepted in GLib, why
would we want them in Geany's code?
Easier said than done unfortunately. The GIO problem about losing data
on write failure has been discussed on their bug tracker, and the
problem is that the fix isn't as obvious at it seems, and people didn't
really agree on how it should be addressed. Unfortunately it didn't go
much further AFAIK, and people started to use hacks and workarounds.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=602412
Right, but is it worth having 2 or 3 ways of writing a file in Geany's
code, only selectable through hidden/various preference, another
(presumably) large code-paths of absolutely critical code, which never
gets any regular testing (except for the default way), and that 99% of
users will never use or care about? I mean if many other Gtk apps are
doing it this way and the sky hasn't fallen (eg. there's only 12
comments on that bug report, many from developers, no crazy users crying
about lost data and stuff), is it an indication that it's just not that
important enough to warrant such workarounds?
Cheers,
Matthew Brush
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.geany.org
https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
