[Compcomm] So what's going on code-wise? Or what we're working on.

[Danny Baumann]

Hi,

> > Including DE integration, offline settings reading/writing and all that
> > stuff? Interesting.
> > How do you want to avoid code duplication in the backends that is always
> > seen as the worst problem of libbs?
> How should the backends duplicate code? One backend uses gconf, one uses
> dbus, one uses flat-files, ... I don't see any duplication there. Look
> at the Backend-superclass and the DbusBackend-class to understand why
> there is no duplication at all.

If there is a settings backend for Gconf in Compiz (I mean gconf.c) and
you write a settings backend, this is what I referred to as code
duplication. At least that's critized a lot in libbs (that it
'duplicates backends'). I did not mean duplication among the code you
write.

> > > > > - compizutil is a higher-level library with an object-oriented design
> > > > 
> > > > And the advantage of that is what?
> > > It is not as "ancient" as procedural programming ... But some C-coders
> > > seem to love their thirty years old language too much to realize that.
> > 
> > I never said I actually love C. I like OOP way better; but I strongly
> > dislike interpreted languages. I also never said Python is a bad
> > language, but the term "higher-level library with an object-oriented
> > design" says exactly nothing.
> Libraries can definetly be written in a higher-level, OOP-style or in a
> more "ancient" and procedural style (e.g. cairo vs. OpenGL) ...

I never doubt that. Please read again: I wrote that I just think
buzzword terms like "higher-level library with an object-oriented
design" don't say anything about the library itself.

> > > Though I still see it like Mike - if compiz is configured properly,
> > > settings-tool produce no errors and plugins are written well, there is
> > > no need to configure compiz whilst it is not running.
> > 
> > If Compiz is configured properly, we don't need any settings manager at
> > all :-P
> Well, if we had no compiz we wouldn't need to configure anything at all
> - so let's dump compiz, right? :D 
> 
> Honestly - now you are getting childish ...

No, you didn't get my point ;-)
I just wanted to point out that it's _not_ safe to assume users will
never ever misconfigure their Compiz.

> > > E.g. all gnome apps will be rewritten in python sooner or later -
> > 
> > Link?

Please?

> > > remember that computers in general are getting faster day by day ...
> > 
> > So it's a good idea to waste this speed and memory by making all our
> > applications interpreted? I see.
> Why do we need improvement at all, right? Let's just continue using our
> good old C64 because coding in basic was so simple (and the light-blue
> on blue looked so nice) ... You must be kidding ;) ...

No, you just should stop misinterpreting me - I'm pretty sure you know
what I want to say ;-)

> All apps I write use the compizutil module. Let's let the users decide
> in the end ... Without brainwashing them before.

Ack - but don't forget everyone is just defending / explaining his
stuff; including you ;-)

Peace.

Regards,

Danny