Re: Standard toolkit
- Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Jul 03, 2005
- 577 views
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:22:31 -0700, Jason Gade <jaygade at gmail.com> wrote: >I haven't looked much at Arwen. Is it a good example of a library? I >mean just looking at how the API is exposed to the user and how the >functions are written. Can the code be used as an example of how to >write *any* library? Yes. I would definitely say it is well written, small, and fast. The code is not especially well commented, though I find it quite easy to follow. The docs are certainly much easier to digest that (say) the win32lib ones, but that may well have something to do with arwen having maybe one fifth the functionality of the latter (I've had to add stuff to get Edita to where it is). >Arwen is Windows-specific, isn't it? Yes. I would [also] say arwen is an excellent way to learn how to use the windows API directly, but maybe I am biased because I have been modifying it as well as/while using it. > >Just wondering because if a set of libraries is recommended as a >standard "user toolkit" it should be cross-platform. That's why I was Just because something is not xplat should not be a reason for refusing to recommending it. As a bad example, perhaps, I use dir (or Explorer) on Windows and ls (or Konqueror) on Linux. Depends.exe is strictly windows-only, since it examines .dll files, but should still feature somewhere on any recommended utility list. Sure, put these things lower down the list, but don't exclude them. >thinking that wxEuphoria would be a good recommendation for >gui/networking toolkit. I know that Win32Lib is much more mature but it >is Windows-specific (for now). I still think that it is probably a good >example of how a library *should* be written but I could be wrong since >I haven't examined it extensively either. Win32lib is indeed stable and feature rich. However I don't think anyone would actually say it should be used as an *example* of how a library *should* be written. That is not the same as saying there is no high-quality code in there, but *starting* a new library, I can't imagine a worse way than attempting to copy win32lib. (I may be talking at cross purposes here; the exposed API of win32lib is in general exceptional.) One of the things about well-written code is that it is highly subjective. In fact, the sole purpose of attempting to craft well-written code is that more people can readily understand it. I will be interested in reviewing whatever you finally declare is well-written. >As per Christian Cuvier's suggestion I am kind of surveying what kind of >library routines are currently used by programmers in Euphoria. I think >that is a good start towards a user toolkit/recommended set of add-on >routines that everyone should have available. CK has a section on his web page devoted to this topic. Regards, Pete