Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: what supported platforms would be lost of one killed vim's own mainloop in favor of glib

Expand Messages
  • Tony Mechelynck
    ... What about MSVC, the main C compiler on Windows? IIUC, it uses neither glib not GTK2. Or, I ve too often seen the phrase that virtually nobody uses today
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 15, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      On 14/08/09 13:37, Ronny Pfannschmidt wrote:
      >
      > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Lech Lorens<lech.lorens@...> wrote:
      >>
      >> On 04-Aug-2009 RonnyPfannschmidt<ronny.pfannschmidt@...> wrote:
      >>>
      >>> hi,
      >>>
      >>> just wondering what would be lost if vim's own mainloop was replaced
      >>> by or at least properly integrated with the glib mainloop
      >>>
      >>> as it would help to integrate things like gio (direct ssh/http file
      >>> access) and dbus
      >>>
      >>> also the current way to deal with gtk and its mainloop seems like a
      >>> big hack that works around vim's mainloop being there first
      >>>
      >>> Regards Ronny
      >>
      >> If you expect anyone to answer your question, I believe you should
      >> elaborate a little bit on the subject. We are either too lazy (e.g. me)
      >> or too busy to be able to dig into every hint of a subject that is
      >> brought up on the list.
      >> Would you mind explaining the possibilities, benefits, costs, risks of
      >> using Glib?
      > the cost is certainly loss of some of the stoneage supported platforms
      > that virtually nobody uses today
      >
      > the benefits and possibilities are
      > * integration of dbus as control protocol
      > * better integration of gtk
      > * using gio to access files on ssh/smb/nfs/http/whatever else gio supports
      > * use of a event/mainloop system that is widely used and understand
      >
      > Regards, Ronny

      What about MSVC, the main C compiler on Windows? IIUC, it uses neither
      glib not GTK2.

      Or, I've too often seen the phrase "that virtually nobody uses today"
      used without any proof to mean "that I don't use and want to drop" --
      and I don't mean specifically on Vim, where Bram's "iron hand in a
      velvet glove" is there to keep compatibility with earlier versions as
      high as possible, but on some other open-source softwares, where I've
      too often seen features dropped with no advance warning to their many
      users, because developers had decided among themselves that "nobody uses
      it anymore".


      Regards,
      Tony.
      --
      Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going to
      speak it to?
      -- Clarence Darrow

      --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
      You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
      -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.