-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

El Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:03:25 +0000
Eric MSP Veith <[email protected]> escribió:
<...>
> > I don't think having an API for each db is a good idea...
> 
> How many DBs do we have? We could just pass around the list head or
> something, just like glib2 does with its list handling functions.
>

active_db, states, ptypes, module_db, option_db, event_db, command_db,
stypes.

> Btw, why don't we just do a static link to some parts of glib2, or
> even carve them out from the source code? Perhaps code reuse
> (theft :D) leads us on a faster way to something. Just a wild
> suggestion.

Glib2 functions are far less efficient. But that's not our current
problem...

> > Another option is to simply pass the list head back through a
> > function (which maybe should be hidden by macros), but that's not
> > as clean as I would like...
> 
> As I'd say, just make it a struct or something, because the programmer
> shouldn't fiddle with it as long as he doesn't know what he does, and
> if he does, well, don't whine when it breaks. (Yes, I'm a Perl
> programmer.)

Well, I guess we can expose the list head, there's not a problem about
that.

My main intention is to separate the functionality to be able to do
major improvements and easily replace components.

- -- 
Ismael Luceno
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkqFzY4ACgkQ/mxY0+yOXJoZvQCeOo+c5dGFOruCZ75bpBd+Ep1S
bqMAoLsOQu20e+uXv01BNvtUZxvIotPc
=1var
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
_______________________________________________
Initng mailing list
[email protected]
http://jw.dyndns.org/mailman/listinfo/initng

Reply via email to