On 02/25/2011 10:00 PM, David Robillard wrote: > On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 21:09 +0100, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
>> That said there is another big problem. This glib dependency, it's way too >> heavy >> for mobile deployment. > > Glib was the most effective route of getting the job done - rewriting > the few bits that are required is not an effective use of my time right > now (it's not exposed in the API, so it's not a compatibility issue, and > there's a ton of more pressing LV2 things that need doing). > > I'm not a huge fan of wheel-reinventing, and on PCs glib is about as > unoffensive a dependency as they come. On mobile, I guess that meg or so > actually makes a difference. > > Replacing glib will not be very difficult, very little of it is used: > just a balanced BST, dynamic array, and ideally a hash table or trie > other appropriate structure for string interning (the BST would do for > this part, with a bit of a performance cost). Good old-fashioned data > structure implementation is my favourite thing to do, but unfortunately > there is no shortage of more pragmatic things that need doing ;) > > Perhaps Stefano's NASPRO core work will do, or using C++ internally, or > just tearing the required bits out of glib itself. Sqlite has an > in-memory hash table IIRC. Code abounds. > > Present a viable alternative, and I'll switch sord/slv2 to it, but I > have no good reason to invest time in reinventing glib right now. I will try and submit a patch to remove glib. It'll take some time because I have dozens of other things to do, but I will work on this. I had a quick look at sord, it seems it only needs glib's sequence and hash table. Is this correct, or will you need some more utilities? -- Olivier _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
