On 20.07.2011 10:04, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK) wrote: >> My concern (as a commercial developer that releases >> static builds) is not whether the code is used, >> but that it's in the lib at all.
... >> Still though, it should be "fixed", by which >> I mean either rewritten or removed. > > Yup. If we can determine which hosts actually need it, and the answer > turns out to be none, then removal would be the easiest option. This should be our first choice, if we can verify that. I hope that Mike will give a comment on this, since he seems to know much about what different systems provide (and maybe why it was added in the first place). > On the other hand, a "volunteer's worth ten pressed-men" as the saying > goes, and if you were going to take a stab at a clean replacement, we > could bundle that under the fltk license and that also resolves things > (without anybody having to try and figure out why we still have it after > all this time...!) Agreed, but then we might have to maintain "dead" code, and given the "complexity" of all that #if HAVE_something stuff, i'd like to remove it for all times... Albrecht _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
