On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Tim Landscheidt <t...@tim-landscheidt.de> wrote: > It depends on what you mean by "requirement". Something > like "a library *must* provide a function normalizeLink() > with these semantics" would probably deter developers from > trying to implement it. If on the other hand there was an > algorithm "if you want to normalize links, do A, B, C, D and > E" and corresponding test cases to check compliance, I think > it would be much more inviting.
+1. Speaking as a framework developer, build a test case and it shall be done! If the list will allow a shameless self plug, based on this thread I've developed an alpha version of a framework (PHP-only, sorry) that: a.) supports all actions and queries in the API without any specialized code in the framework b.) supports updates to the API with a simple svn update, and c.) automagically selects a backend (HTTP by default but database server if available) for queries without the need to code for any given environment. Right now I'm seeing speed increases on the order of 2.5x and am a very happy camper. I've got to make it look all pretty (phpDocumented and such) and fix a couple encapsulation violations in the architecture, but if anyone's interested in betaing it once I can stand others looking at it, let me know! It's possible some bugs aren't going to be found except through actual use cases, encountering things like columns and indexes that don't exist on the Toolserver. Cheers, -Madman _______________________________________________ Toolserver-l mailing list (Toolserver-l@lists.wikimedia.org) https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l Posting guidelines for this list: https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette
