2009/12/31 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]>: > Cesar, > > Sometimes rewriting is exactly the right thing to do. For example, Object > Arts wrapped the Microsoft XML library. First, there is the question of > untrusted input and MS binaries (yikes!!!), but also, any time bad input went > into it, it would fire off an error with no indication of where it got into > trouble. For some reason, MS did not think to take an IStream pointer that > would have allowed one to check the position. > > For an http client, OA again wrapped MS binaries, complete with the typical > punishing timeouts under MS control, and being hobbled if IE had been set (or > set itself) to work offline. > I really , see no reason why one would want to wrap such things around. They are so basic, so easy to implement by yourself and not being dependent on crap which comes from MS.
> Dolphin is a wonderful product, but users would have been better served with > home-grown code in those cases. > > Bottom line: I think we should rewrite when it makes sense to do so, and wrap > just about anything that makes sense for interoperability. Clearly there is > a lot to wrap, and priorities must be set, as it will often fall on an > individual to do the dirty work. SSL is a no-brainer. > Why keep bugging about missing bindings to foo/bar? If you would really need them, you would already implement them by yourself. Event if you are not skilled enough to deal with FFI/primitives stuff, there are a lot of people who do , and can help you with that. Just ask. > Bill > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
