On 20/06/14 09:15, Max wrote: > 19.06.2014 13:24, Ximin Luo пишет: > >> >> glib isn't glibc. >> > > Doh! Sometimes I type faster than I think :) > > If we consider libotr only than yes, glib is a dependency which could be > rather > easily avoided. But if we consider OTR as a whole - libotr plus half-a-dozen > bindings > for various languages than I think it's a different story. > > GI takes care of automating lots of boilerplate code - that's why making > language > bindings using it is almost completely automated task. If we simply do not > use glib > for that (or worse - trying to reinvent it) than this boilerplate stuff > doesn't > magically disappear: it got to be written by someone. And tested. And > maintained. So > the net result is actually more code and bigger attack surface. > > Disclaimer: I'm not one of OTR devs so it's only humble advice nothing more. > > cheers, > Max. >
Is it possible to split the glib stuff away from core libotr, to result in libotr and libotr-glib? That would work, the only counterargument being "2 shared libs are annoying to deal with". X -- GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OTR-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-dev
