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

List:       kde-games-devel
Subject:    Re: [Kde-games-devel] Client-Master
From:       George Staikos <staikos () kde ! org>
Date:       2001-04-13 20:31:53
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 12 April 2001 18:15, Burkhard Lehner wrote:
> Hi, Martin!
>
> > There is an obvious extension to your proposal: Extend the
> > KExtendedSocket with the missing functionality from QSocket. Then all of
> > KDE can profit from it!
>
> Why not the other way round? Extend QSocket with the missing support for
> SOCKS? Maybe that would be possible by just subclassing QSocket. Or one
> would have to change the QSocket code, but - hey! - Qt is GPL now!

  That would be difficult.  You would have to make changes to Qt to get SOCKS 
to work (without using LD_PRELOAD, which isn't available everywhere, or 
linking directly to libsocks).

> I think that is a big problem in KDE development: There are too many
> classes doing just the same. That won't help keeping the libraries small

   Are you trying to make a KDE library or a generic gaming library?  You 
have to decide this to start.  If you want to make a "KDE" gaming library, 
you should be using kdelibs wherever possible.

> and fast. And since everyone knows that KDE classes have very bad API
> reference documentation, it is really hard for a developer to choose the
> right one.

  Not all of them.  Some do though. 

> Why is there another KSocket class instead of using QSocket, which is just
> excellent? And there is QServerSocket, QSocketDevice and QDns, three more
> excellent classes, but noone seems to be willing to use them. What's the
> reason?

  Because they are inadequate for our needs.  What you should do is improve 
upon our classes.  (the K* ones)

-- 

George Staikos

_______________________________________________
Kde-games-devel mailing list
Kde-games-devel@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-games-devel

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