Re: [gtkmm] Talk about a major rewrite
- From: "P. Christeas" <p_christ hol gr>
- To: murrayc usa net
- Cc: gtkmm-list <gtkmm-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [gtkmm] Talk about a major rewrite
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 16:14:25 +0300
> > At this point of discussion I don't expect to look into the code. That's
> > why I don't refer to particular bugs. My questions are:
> > - do the design pitfals constitute the need for a re-design?
>
> What design pitfalls? Give us specifics.
[flame-starter..]
I personally avoid stl. It introduces too many code lines for the simplest
things. The compiler then is pushed and more likely to mis-interpret things
(the gcc 3.1 problems etc.). Moreover, the core code is less human-readable.
One more thing is that of iterators. By referring to an object with its
pointer, bad coding results in havoc. One example is when I deleted an object
and the iterator was still around. It is very diffficult to check the
consistency of data holded by pointers. On the other hand, integer indexes of
C lists are easier to debug. Giving a bad index can be recognized at once.
Indexes are slower, but much safer. It will be the app's fault when such a
thing happens, but the API must indicate the trouble.
I'm also working on a model to replace reference counting. As I mentioned
before, I'm not planning to release anything before September. Then, you may
look at my code and see if it makes things better. I 've been using C++ for
many years and some other programs I've written (proprietary ones) seem
amazingly stable. I wanted to contribute to make the toolkit (gtkmm or other)
that stable.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]