On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 23:31 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> Hi again,
> Sven Neumann wrote:
> > Since there is no GTK+ dependency in the two files, nor any dependency
> > on code that has a GTK+ dependency, there is no dependency from core to
> > the UI here. The files are just better located in app/display as that is
> > where they are used.
> I don't understand why you insist on reasoning about files when the GIMP 
> code is divided into modules. I agree that if considering only 
> individual files, the core does not have a dependency to the UI code. If 
> we limit our reasoning to modules however, do you then agree with the 
> conclusion that the core has a dependency to UI code?

When we split up the GIMP core into sub-directories, we also split the
code into UI and core. You will find a few files in the UI
sub-directories that hold nothing but config settings. Since the non-UI
GIMP should be able to read the same config files that the UI-enabled
GIMP uses, the non-UI code needs to be know about some config settings
that are part of the UI. That's why gimp-console needs to link a few
files from the non-UI parts of GIMP. Does that mean that these files
should be moved to other folders? No, because they are in the right
location, close to the code that actually uses them. Does that mean that
there is a dependency that needs to be fixed? No, not unless you want to
drop the possibility to share config files between the UI-enabled and
the non-UI GIMP.


Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to