We've seen this pattern more lately. Libraries that exist for quite some time, proven to be reliable and frequently used (especially by the author) for some reason need to be changed. I don't see any real arguments - and definitely not a real problem someone ran into - but do see reluctance of the original author. I experience this myself with the delay-library which seems not to measure up to new standards. The thing is it works for me. It probably does for most people. As a matter of fact: I can't think of a real, common reason why one needs to use an other timer. In addition to this, it is simple, it is well-tested and has a small footprint. Changing this would mean I need to update and retest over a dozen apps before I can start on an new version. Wasted effort, probably required at some point in time it is inconvenient.
So, when are libraries to be changed (opposed to new ones created, like ADC and like PRINT adding to the old FORMAT)? And how can a proper working situation be guaranteed while the refactoring is in progress? And - maybe most important - what if the original author objects? Maybe we should leave the libraries as is when the original author does not agree and create a new library. At some point the (a) benevolent dictator can decide to remove the old lib from the distribution if multiple libraries become a burden. Joep 2011/8/12 Sebastien Lelong <[email protected]>: > I second Matt (just in case there were any doubts :)) > Cheers, > Seb > > 2011/8/12 mattschinkel <[email protected]> >> >> I can keep API the same, except for the include block. Please allow >> updates to old files to match the up to date files. There is no need >> to have 10 of the same library. >> >> Albert Faber has already done an update, I see his name as Adapted-by. >> >> Matt. >> >> On Aug 12, 5:07 am, Eur van Andel <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Sent from my iPad >> > >> > On 12 aug. 2011, at 07:52, vasile surducan <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Why don't you let the TC77 as is and create a TC77-SPI >> > > compatible Jallib library instead? >> > >> > Indeed. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "jallib" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Sébastien Lelong > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "jallib" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
