On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 17:38 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > >>>>> "John" == John Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > John> One thing that I think a lot of coders would agree with is > John> that that the Asterisk code base is not pretty. Asterisk > John> started out as a hack and from what I've seen has continued on > John> this way for a very long time never really getting any better. > > vs what? > Have you looked at other proprietary PBX systems? > > I know someone that works on such a system, in C++ on MS, and he wishes his > cow-orkers would write code as nice as asterisk.
I'm not comparing it to anything in particular other than "best practices" for coding which in and of itself is a matter for much debate. I guess by way of a specific example I would cite the fact that there are about a 1/2 dozen different ways to pass parameters in Asterisk. Some use "," separators, some "|", and so on. I know they are working toward a consistent standard but to the critical eye this would seem "messy". I think Asterisk is soon due for a "cleanup" release. No new features just bug fixes and stability work. I'd think 1.5 would be appropriate once we get jitter, faxing, and line presence done. John
