[openbeos] Re: BObjectList vs. TypedList

Does Beos support gcc 3.x ? will it ?

--- Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Axel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=F6rfler ?= wrote:
> 
> > > I believe, this has not been discussed yet, but will soon be of
> > > relevance for the SK team; therefore I bring it up. Most of you
> > > certainly know the nice class BObjectList, a type save and
> extended
> > > BList subclass. It is part of the OpenTracker source and, due
> to its
> > > usefullness, already found its way into our repository
> (headers/
> > > private
> > > /shared/ObjectList.h).
> >
> > We might also just move it into os/support/, shouldn't we?
> 
> If we intend to declare it a public API, we should do that. Then we
> should
> make sure, that the usual binary compatibility precautions are
> taken
> (for _PointerList_).
> 
> > > Now there exist two facts, that may be less well known:
> > > 1) There exists a very similar class, TypedList, which has been
> used
> > > by
> > > Be internally. I believe, that TypedList has been copied and
> renamed
> > > to
> > > BObjectList, when the Tracker source has been released. At this
> time
> > > they may differ a bit.
> > >
> > > 2) Both classes are not directly derived from BList, but from
> > > _PointerList_ and PointerList respectively. Neither of these
> classes
> > > has an OpenBeOS implementation yet (hint, hint ;-).
> > >
> > > Why bother, you might ask, when TypedList was used internally
> only,
> > > then we can just drop it?! Well, unfortunately its usage
> `leaked'
> > > into
> > > private but visible API, the Device (Map) API, the SK team is
> about
> > > to
> > > tackle. It is used in the OpenTracker (as well as in
> mountvolume (and
> > > should also be used in DriveSetup, BTW)) and thus we have to
> > > replicate
> > > it.
> > >
> > > So the question at hand is: Do we want to implement both list
> > > classes?
> > > Personally I would vote for dropping TypedList. The consequence
> is
> > > obviously, that we would also drop binary and source
> compatibility
> > > with
> > > respect to the Device API. But since the only applications
> using that
> > > private API are either open source (OpenTracker) or have to be
> > > replicated by us anyway (mountvolume), that wouldn't actually
> harm.
> >
> > Since you obviously are planning on other changes as well, we
> could
> > just completely drop binary and source compatibility and resolve
> all
> > issues with this API.
> 
> Er, well, yes. :-) This idea came a bit later though. :-)
> 
> > Of course, someone should then work on a DiskProbe replacement
> sooner
> > or later :-))
> 
> DriveSetup? Well, at least an almost empty implementation already
> exists
> in the tree. BTW, since DriveSetup uses the DriveSetup add-ons
> directly
> (not through the Device API), and we are not going to replicate
> this
> interface, this has to be done anyway.
> 
> CU, Ingo
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

Other related posts: