RE: win32lib & global functions
- Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com> Oct 03, 2003
- 360 views
I'm talking about names -- my functions may not even do the same thing that yours do. Plus your way still leads to broken code, which is why I brought this up in the first place. I downloaded the win32lib beta, and it broke some of my already-working win32lib programs because there were now namespace conflicts with functions I already had in other libraries. And given the attitude that it is ok to "globalize" whatever functions you desire that win32lib might become DEPENDENT ON but aren't functions which are not part of win32lib's purpose, you can expect to break more code in the future as you add more arbitrary (& undocumented) functions. I'm not trying to get you to force anything on anybody, I'm trying to get you to STOP forcing something on everybody. Your way leads to broken code and conflicts that can be avoided. My way leads to no broken code (in theory) and no conflicts. Isn't that better? (I say in theory because yes, it will lead to some broken code if you underwent the transition I am suggesting, but it wouldn't have if you hadn't used the generic names in the first place or hadn't made them global. But sometimes you have to pay a price to fix a mistake.) I don't know why everyone is getting so huffy -- I was just suggesting a sensible plan so no one will have to deal with conflicts and broken code! I don't understand why you would argue in favor of such things when it can be easily avoided...