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

List:       krbdev
Subject:    Re: RFC: libverto nearing release
From:       Ezra Peisach <epeisach () MIT ! EDU>
Date:       2011-07-09 2:38:55
Message-ID: 4E17BF3F.3070609 () mit ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

One concern that I have with this library is that you do not 
define/document a required set of options. Yes - you test some at 
runtime - but is that really universal.

For instance, the signal handling that you have implemented - it 
requires glib 2.29 - which is not available in earlier versions.  I can 
deal with requiring a minimal library version. The problem I have is 
that depending on your "backend" - some signals are allowed or not. glib 
only allows SIGINT, SIGTERM, SIGHUP.  When you try to use a different 
signal - libverto will not return a handle - as the low level glib traps 
it. Your test suite uses SIGUSR1/2 - but the test suite returns 
not-supported - so your code never really tests the glib library support

No - here is the rub - how can you write implementation code - as an 
end-user - when the implementations are restricting you.  I cannot write 
"portable" code using the library - as I need to know the backend 
implementation before hand.... [glib timeout code being up to 10ms less 
than your requested time is another gotcha]

I do not know what other demons lurk beneath the surface...  Clearly 
these would need to be documented. Any code/plugins that use libverto 
would need to use the lowest common denominator of all features...

Ezra

_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list             krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]