Juuso Alasuutari wrote: > And about GObject... well, why bother? I understood from your reply to Nedko > that you're not suggesting that GObject be enforced into the actual LASH API, > which is a relief. I fail to see any benefit in GObject-ifying the internals, > either.
Yes, pretty please with sugar on top: please don't introduce the GObject madness where it's not necessary. I mean, GObject has its uses in GTK or other frameworks that are very complex to start with. But please don't introduce complex, unintuitive, wrist-damaging tools where a plain C-based[*] API could work just as well. [*] Yes, I know GObject is C-based, but it's a whole layer of a huge complex type system on top of C type system. It's also very far from convenient, especially as far as introducing new types goes. Chris _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
