Quoting Hal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hey list, > > Mucking around with gtk+ libglade etc I downloaded the source for eog. > % for file in **/**.c; do cat $file; done | wc -l > tells me there are 26636 lines of code in .c files. > This is approximately an order of magnitude more lines of code than I > was expecting. Eog > doesn't seem to do very much and most of the tricky stuff (gtk, image > rendering etc.) is done by libraries. > > Am I massively underestimating the complexity of code required for a > simple gnome application? > Is eog not such a good example of a simple but real gnome application? > Something else altogether?
EOG code, in its latest versions and also in SVN trunk, is a bit old and more complicated than we would like. For example, some parts of the code implement things that nowadays are implemented by GTK+, but when they were first needed, they weren't (like the EogWrapList, for example). As a result, the code is bigger than it should. So yes, I think the EOG code you got is not the best example of a GNOME application given the age of the code, and the tons of patches and workarounds it has suffered of. However, you can grab the eog-ng branch from SVN, where we've been rewriting a *a lot* of it. I'd like to say it's a much better example of a today's GNOME application, its code is way cleaner and more enjoyable, but I wouldn't say it's *that* simple neither. But hey, what's simple and interesting in this life? :-) HTH, Claudio -- Claudio Saavedra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------- Este correo fue enviado por http://alumnos.utalca.cl _______________________________________________ gnome-love mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love
