[ooc-compiler] Re: libadt issues

[Tim T. <ti...@ed...>]

Hallo!

> The libadt attempt ran into a dead end because we were too ambitiuous
[...]
Correct.


> That being said, replacing the modules with standalone versions that
[...]
Also correct :-) The relevant part for me and for VO is, to have some
containers that are proven to work and the ability to share them. I
would still prefer the more complete solution but I must admit that
that may not be possible. As you said Oberon-2 fails in that part.

> renaming is necessary.  Any modules that aren't used by anyone are
> dropped.  Features that aren't considered useful and that are not used

Fore VO the list stuff and perhaps the hashable you mentioned are
interesting.

> Please consider that adding libadt to the compiler distribution may
> not be as helpful as you think.  The oo2c distrib is very stable.  It
> takes months to accumulate enough changes to warrant a new release.
> _If_ libadt is ever used, it will change more frequently than the
> compiler distrib.  There must be separate distribution, and libadt
> will never be part of the official core library.  This is no reason

True. However this "official" argumentation might be enough. If we
"sell" it as official (but not stable) part of oo2c, which is only a
separate product just because of distribution issues, it is "official"
enough to make VO depend on it. I still do not like the fact, that
people must install a number of packages to start working with VO,
exspecially the version dependencies will make things worse, but that
is the problem with linux and even other GUI libraries, too.

> not to include it, of course, provided that there is enough support
> and someone is willing to maintain the separate distribution file.

Is it possible to always add the current version to the oo2c
distribution but still offer separate updates which can be installer
over the oo2c one? Would be the best of both worlds?

> The very short summary of this very long posting is this: If libadt is
> used, I am willing to add it to the compiler distribution.  "Being
> used" is the most important requirement.  The other requirements have
> a lower priority.

Marco has shown interest in using it within VO, and I would do so, too.
I also have plans to use libxml, as told. I also once promissed to support
the oo2c namespaces, but havn´t done till now :-/ Since my time is limited
I can promisse to use it, but can not give a time frame. However I long
worked on a similar library written in C++ for Windows (and gtk) at
work, which had stolen lot of my motivation. This projects has been
canceled and so I now have a little bit more motivation for my private
Oberon version and In fact I already started to integrate some of the
ideas used in the C++ version...

Btw., I will we partly away for the next few weeks (till the end of
september). I´m going to hospital for a few days (nobody to offer my a
laptop with linux?) and after that I will go on holiday (no exact time
frame yet). So answers may take a while.

--
Gruß...
       Tim.