Marti,
For me lcms works good. I just wanted to point out this toppic.
An version bump, when at the time You decide seems right.
Please keep us informed about the new features. Does CMM mean the single
lcms endity or can we await more. (would perhaps save me much time)
regards
Kai-Uwe Behrmann
+ development for color management
+ imaging / panoramas
+ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ CMS proposal <www.behrmann.name>
Am 04.02.05, 12:10 +0100 schrieb Marti Maria:
>
> Hi,
>
> Kai-Uwe Behrmann said:
>
> > As X is an large project, I prefere to ask You in the first place.
> > Would You mind to rename the typedef BOOL in the lcms header?
>
> and Hans Leidekker said:
>
> >It would also be nice if no editing is needed for the header to be
> >useable on Windows and non-Windows systems.
>
> I obviously see your point. And agree BOOL and in general all
> windows-like types would pollute global namespace. My main concern
> is about breaking existing code. Let's take for example the tifficc utility.
> It just #includes the lcms header and then use BOOL, DWORD and so
> in the rest of program.
>
> Of course I can change tifficc, jpegicc and all other utilities, no problem
> on that. My concern is about other's code. What if a new release without
> such defines makes other programs/libraries to die hard? Up to date I've
> tried to do my best in keeping lcms backwards-compatible, so just
> replacing lcms version and recompiling lcms should work.
> No modifications are required to upgrade version. I assume most
> programmers would agree this has some value at all.
>
> Anyway, this is a real problem. And quite probably, the solution would
> be major version bump. At that point, there are some planned features
> that would make a major version bump more, humm... say affordable.
>
> Any thoughts? What do you think is the best move, add a LCMS_*
> prefix on all those types and label the new code as 2.0? Or just keep
> the 1.* convention until the smart CMM and gamut mapping features
> were available? Or just keep actual #defines untouched?
>
> Regards,
> Marti Maria
> The little cms project
> http://www.littlecms.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kai-Uwe Behrmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Lcms Liste" <lcms-user@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:07 AM
> Subject: [Lcms-user] BOOL -> LCMS_BOOL
>
>
> > Marti,
> >
> > I found the
> > typedef CARD8 BOOL
> > in an X header.
> >
> > As X is an large project, I prefere to ask You in the first place.
> > Would You mind to rename the typedef BOOL in the lcms header?
> >
> > I think it is no good idea by the X project to use this type too. They
> > should have known that someone else will put such an type in
> > the global namespace too.
> >
> > I know about the #define workaround You suggested. As it seems an
> > repeated request I like to confirm.
> >
> > kind regards
> > Kai-Uwe Behrmann
> > + development for color management
> > + imaging / panoramas
> > + email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
Lcms-user mailing list
Lcms-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lcms-user
