On 11/20/2014 02:14 PM, Keith Creasy wrote:
Good point and I'm afraid it boils down to the time investment that would be required to even comprehend the LibLouis code well enough to make significant changes without breaking things. I know that's my hesitation. Doing the programming to fix LibLouis probably isn't too difficult but the other factors; learning the code, understanding and writing tests... make it a tedious, time consuming and unpleasant prospect.
I don't want to get caught in a bike shedding argument but I think we have to concede that we have in liblouis a) a lot of code which does mostly what it is supposed to do and b) it is written in a language which can be used from virtually anywhere (Python, Java, Lua, you name it).
Of course we could do it better in language X but the time you'd have to invest is beyond a reasonable return on investment, especially if all you get is better emphasis handling.
As for how hard it is to comprehend the liblouis code I can attest that it is not super easy but even I who am hardly a genius C hacker managed to sort of understand what was going on and even fix a bug here or there.
Given there are some really talented and dedicated people on this list I think we should manage to improve the exiting code base.
Thanks Christian -- Christian Egli Swiss Library for the Blind, Visually Impaired and Print Disabled Grubenstrasse 12, CH-8045 Zürich, Switzerland For a description of the software, to download it and links to project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com