GLib debate

Dave Cridland [Home] dave at
Mon Jul 21 23:20:31 EEST 2003

On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 15:55, Alexander Kellett wrote:
> i'm confused as to why people would even bother sharing code in 
> the first place, more time is wasted on this thread than it would 
> take to just reimplement in both toolkits.

Yes, and in addition, if the standard/specification is followed, it
shouldn't matter whatever language and toolkit is used. (Personally, I'm
a C++/STL kinda guy, and I'm sure I could wrap GList or whatever into an
STL compatible container without problems, but that's irrelevant.)

> shared code will just slow everyone down, it will make for
> untested specifications and will just cause a thousand and 
> one more conversations about toolkits in the end.  

My toolkit is, incidentally, better than yours. Nobody else has
explicitly stated this thus far, so I thought I would, it's obviously
where much of the conversation is going.

I'm not sure that shared code will slow people down - I do, though,
think that there's a marked difference between a reference
implementation, a specification, and a required library, and we should
be wary of muddying the waters.

Personally, I'd be delighted to see multiple implementations of all the
specifications and standards, and rather concerned if there were only

Now, who do I call a facist so this thread can officially end?


More information about the xdg mailing list