Re: [libxml++] Benefit of the dependency on glibmm
- From: Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>
- To: Alexander Vassilev <avasilev voipgate com>
- Cc: libxmlplusplus-general lists sourceforge net
- Subject: Re: [libxml++] Benefit of the dependency on glibmm
- Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:55:15 +0100
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 01:23 +0200, Alexander Vassilev wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am new to libxml and libxml++ so I am not much familiar with the code
> of libxml++ (i've just had a quick and superfluous look). Reading the
> dependency requirements i stumbled upon the line "glibmm-2.4
> <http://www.gtkmm.org/> (or a subset of it containing at least
> Glib::ustring)". As I am developing for the windows platform (along with
> linux and macos), I am a bit picky about dependencies (not easy on
> windows). What worried me here is the dependency on glibmm, which in
> turn depends on glib itself, which depends on several other gnu libs.
> My question is - how heavily does libxml++ depend on glibmm and on
> GLib::ustring? Is it theoretically possible to use std::string instead
> and possibly directly libiconv for unicode conversions? Is this a
> feasible idea, or I have missed something in my quick look?
It's entirely doable in a (renamed) fork. But that would have to be
maintained by somebody who wants it enough. So far nobody has made the
effort:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=320197
ustring is just used to make the API nicer. No encoding conversion is
actually done in libxml++. That's taken care of by libxml.
By the way, this has been discussed repeatedly before.
--
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]