Re: Refactoring

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 18:09 +0000, Rob Taylor wrote:
> Philip Van Hoof wrote:
 
> >    I know a lot of glib fans will disagree with the necessity for this
> >    (hey Rob!), nonetheless is this actually needed indeed.
> 
> So, does that also involve removing GObject support? I presume so as the
> only reason you could want to do this is to build without a glib
> dependency, right? If so, I'll let Mark know he doesn't need to bother
> continuing with the pygobject based bindings..

I don't think I will ever stop using GObject nor will I stop depending
on glib. It's just the GMainLoop part that I no longer want to consume
unless the toolkit uses it.

In fact am I planning to rewrite some of the abstract types and
interfaces using Vala. Unless Jurg is planning to implement a backend
that doesn't use GObject ... 

Differently put, I want the libtinymailui library to implement an
abstraction for me, and consume the abstraction. While for
libtinymailui-gtk that implementation will just use GMainLoop, of
course.

Using a GObject instance in for example Qt, is not problematic. Using
GMainLoop with recent versions is probably not problematic either. But
if it's more ideal for both old and recent versions of Qt to use their
mainloop ... then I would love tinymail to do that in stead.


-- 
Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
http://pvanhoof.be/blog
http://codeminded.be