[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Haleluja :-)
From:       weis () stud ! uni-frankfurt ! de
Date:       1999-06-19 16:47:06
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Steffen Hansen wrote:

> On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Sven Radej wrote:
> 
> > >That's great news! Will we switch to such a tinyMico?
> > 
> > Er... this means we are kind of forking the tree. Unless Kay  provides some
> > kind of #ifdef TINYMICO or --tiny-mico configure option.
> > 
> > If we don't use that STL (mini or true) who does then? Mico itself?
> 
> MICO uses STL a _lot_. This is one of main reasons it's bloated.

It can use mini-stl which makes mico about 800kB smaller.

> > As far as I understood there still should be change in IDL to make "Qt-like
> > source" . Will then (mini) STL still be needed?
> 
> A version of MICO that uses Q* datastructures will be harder to
> produce/maintain because a lot of code has to be changed. What Torben did
> was mostly to "just" remove a lot of code and do "./configure 
> --with-mini-stl".

And that is what we can get in the mico CVS I hope.
 
> What about the MinimumCORBA spec. people talk about? I think it's intended
> for embedded solutions and such.

I did not yet look at it. I wanted to see what can be done with
MICO without changing so much that we actually do a fork.

Bye
Torben
 
> greetings,
> -- 
> Steffen Hansen                            
> email: stefh@mip.sdu.dk, stefh@imada.sdu.dk, hansen@kde.org 
> URL:   http://www.mip.sdu.dk/~stefh       
> 
> 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]