Re: [GNOME VFS] gob inside gnome-vfs ...

Alex Graveley <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.vfs
Message-ID <1024682000.1460.32.camel@luna>
Hi,

On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 12:13, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 16:22, Alex Graveley wrote:
> > Internal module usage of other modules is near nil, and there seems to
> > be little shared code between the modules that would be helped by a
> > GObject switch.
> 
> 	The fact that few modules use each other, is not an argument for this
> not happening in future. Also, there are some quite good cleanliness,
> and standardization arguments - if this can all be done with minimal API
> additions etc. That is if GObject instantiation is fast enough - which
> it can probably be made. There's no need to use signals for anything, so
> GObject would just formalize & standarize the existing structure which
> is a great improvement to my mind.

Yes, it is.  Modules can already use the public gnome-vfs api to talk to
other modules.  GObject-izing is a big chunk of work, won't bring any
cleanliness to existing code, and is going to be the cause for many
subtle races, I suspect.

Besides, 2.x is about user-visible changes.  What is user-visible about
this work [1]?

-Alex

[1] Instead, why isn't time being spent on things apps can actually use
to make visible changes... a capabilities api, a metadata api outside of
nautilus, a file searching interface, fixing the http module, cleaning
the existing disgusting code, GThread-izing, security-auditing, *archive
support*, blah blah blah blah... [2]

[2] Forgive the random bitching.

-- 
"I don't find excessive sanity a virtue."

_______________________________________________
gnome-vfs maillist  -  [email protected]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/gnome-vfs
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.