[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev coding style, ifdefs

From: Vlad Harchev
Subject: Re: lynx-dev coding style, ifdefs
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 18:27:44 +0500 (SAMST)

On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> > > But you could have started with a copy of SGML.c and made changes to that
> > > copy.  No writing-from-scratch of existing stuff would have been required.
> > > (And, to turn your argument around: you could have asked us.)
> > 
> >  But making modifications inplace makes them automatically up-todate to all
> > code changes (for example you added XML support :)
> So it's strictly for your convenience.
> Note: I have *not* added XML support.  That is completely wrong, let's not
> give false impressions.  Any clain that lynx can parse XML in a meaningful
> way would be wrong.  (Unless it's an XHTML document that happens to also
> be valid as an HTML document.)
> The only XML-ish thing in my patch is that <foo/> is treated as an empty
> element, a construct which happens to also be used in XML.  It already
> won't work that way when there's anything between "foo" and the "/"
> (including a space, I think).

  OK. But you've done some other changes to SGML.c - and prettysrc is up-today
as I guess too.
> > >[...]
> > > > So, programmers' efforts (regrading studying SGML.c) are less 
> > > > signtificant
> > > > than the features/flexibility users get with syntax highlighter IMO.
> > > 
> > > Take this a step further, and you are basically saying that all that's
> > > important is that users get features.  Don't bother about the coders.
> > > Well if everyone before you had thought that way, you wouldn't have any
> > > sort of more-or-less readable code to start playing with.  Maybe you
> > > wouldn't have any free software.
> > 
> >   If everyone before me had thought that way, I probably wouldn't have 
> > started
> > lynx hacking since the features I need were already there.
> So all the time Foteos Macrides spent adding comments and explanations
> was wasted time, and if he had not done so, Lynx would be in a better shape
> now (and would have all the features you need)?  Yeah right.

  As I understand, he was paid for that (he was working in the university as I
understand). I would write comments, spent 10 times more time on lynx code if
I was paid for, but I have to earn money most time... But nevertheless, a lot
of thanks to him and the other guys who coded lynx.

> Those comments are a lot more worth to lynx as a whole than *any* specific
> feature, IMO.

  May be. 

> [...]
> >   But I don't stress on the usability of this. I can remove all such 
> > "markup"
> > if you and other lynx-devers prefer (and will never use it in the patches).
> So you don't object if someone else removes it?
> (Not that I'm planning to do that in general...)

  I won't object - anybody should feel free to do it.
>    Klaus

 Best regards,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]