Re: [Banshee-List] Fwd: Lastfm 2.0 access

[LCID Fire <lcid-fire gmx net>]

Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 1:33 PM, LCID Fire <lcid-fire gmx net> wrote:
>> Andrew Conkling wrote:
>>> If you rule that criterion out, would you be in better shape?
>> I would - since I could use a minor proxy and change it so it runs
>> within one process.
> 
> Why do you need an in-process proxy? Can't you just provide the cache
> on your own (using sqlite for example) instead of blindly hammering
> the API and using another library for sanitization?
I could - but to me there is no point in doing things more than once
(e.g. in further projects). So if I need some caching I don't think
about doing this fast - I'm thinking about doing this the right way -
which to me is having a black box that is doing all the caching and is
reusable.
So I don't "need" an in-process proxy - it's just the most elegant
design I can think of.