I agree with Oleg, please consider contributing as joining a community, not
just providing source code.

Otherwise, a code dump can just happen anywhere.

Gary


On Tue, Mar 16, 2021, 09:24 Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 2021-03-16 at 13:28 +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > Am 15.03.2021 um 19:50 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski:
> > > ...
> > > Hi Julian
> > >
> > > Pretty much all message parsing routines in core [1] and client are
> > > based on Tokenizer [2]. Those parsers are forward-only and produce
> > > near
> > > zero (or fairly little) intermediate garbage.
> > >
> > > Id would be nice if parsing code in Structured Field Values re-used
> > > some of the message element parsers or were based on the Tokenizer
> > > if
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > Oleg
> > > ...
> >
> > Re-using existing message element parsers would not work; structured
> > fields is a new format and requires draconic error handling.
> >
> > Also, the parser internally is based on java.nio.CharBuffer, using it
> > in
> > a forward-only way (if I understand the term correctly), and only
> > allocates objects in order to build the resulting object model (which
> > can be quite complex in structured-fields).
> >
> > It's probably *possible* to rewrite all of this in order to re-use
> > some
> > existing code, but then it's somewhat unclear how this would make it
> > in
> > any way better.
> >
> > Best regards, Julian
> >
>
> It may not necessarily make it any better, but it would most certainly
> make new code more consistent with the rest of the code base, so that
> poor suckers like myself who maintain the library on a day by day basis
> might have a bit easier life maintaining your contribution.
>
> This also makes it somewhat unclear why one would want to contribute
> new code without making an effort of fitting it into the existing code
> base.
>
> This is a not a deal breaker, just a request for your consideration.
>
> We have a history of various people dropping a large chunks of code on
> us and walking away, leaving us with a thankless task of maintaining
> their original code for years to come. So far, if the past history is
> of any indication, all those contributions inevitably started to rot
> unless they fit well with the rest of the code base.
>
> Oleg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to