On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 23:46 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:38:36AM -0700, Kip Warner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 08:37 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > Instead of patching it, what about nuking src/base64.c completely in
> > > favor of the g_base64_{de,en}code() that were added in glib 2.12?
> > >
> > > Would you test the performance if I'd send you a patch?
> > >
> > > cu
> > > Adrian
> >
> > Hey Adrian,
>
> Hi Kip,
>
> > It sounds like a good idea, but it might not be the best thing right
> > now. Glib 2.12 was when those routines were added and right now
> > libglib-dev virtual package has libglib1.2-dev still as it's dependency
>
> libglib2.0-dev is what you are looking for.
>
> > (at least for GNU users running Jaunty as far as I know). So I'm
> > thinking 2.x branch may not be considered stable yet.
>
> 2.x is stable since 2002.
>
> > I'm also not sure
> > how available it will be on non-free platforms. It's probably there,
> > just one more thing to add complications to at build time. My patch
> > doesn't require us to change or add dependencies fortunately.
>
> EasyTAG already requires glib >= 2.8.0 directly, and through it's
> dependency on GTK+ >= 2.12.0 it indirectly requires glib >= 2.14.
>
> cu
> Adrian
Hey Adrian,
In that case, it sounds like a good idea if the performance is good.
Although since it works extremely fast now, I'm not sure if there will
be any benefit to swapping the code with another routine. Maybe
experiment.
--
Kip Warner -- Software Developer
President & CEO Kshatra Corp.
OpenPGP encrypted/signed mail preferred
http://www.thevertigo.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part