Re: Lots of libraries ...

[Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>]

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 13:47 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > I'd rather have libgdk-pixbuf be definitely split out from GTK+ (and
> > fixed with the API breaking fury of an angry god of old while we're at
> > it) instead - which would collide with the whole idea of having fewer
> > libraries but at least would make it possible to have parallel graphical
> > libraries not depend on (and page in) GTK+ itself.
> 
> I've heard ideas about turning GdkPixbuf into an image loader for Cairo,
> rather than the current GdkPixbuf struct, which does waste quite a lot
> of memory (try loading a few jpeg 2000 files...)

I'd rather have (as Clutter maintainer) a library that allows me to
submit a memory area to do the decoding in, so that, for instance,
Clutter could use a Pixel Buffer Object and avoid a copy.

but my point was more: there are valid use cases for libraries to depend
on a common image loading and conversion library (such as gdk-pixbuf)
and if we statically link it in gtk+ it means that those libraries will
have to link against gtk+ itself - when that might very well not be
desirable.

> > > PS. is it only my libunique that links a handful of X extensions it is
> > > unlikely to need ?
> > 
> > libunique uses GDK - plus some Xlibs API to gather a fallback timestamp.
> 
> I would expect most of libunique to be obsolete with GApplication and
> GtkApplication (or I at least hope so).

that's the plan. I was just referring to the current state of libunique.

ciao,
 Emmanuele.

-- 
W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name
B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi