[openbeosstorage] Re: BMimeType
- From: Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosstorage@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 01:45:23 -0700
> I'm undetermined. ;-)
> Well, since implementation is always the smallest part of the work -- yes,
> BMimeType is quite big and the registrar also has to be done, but the
> implementations shouldn't be that complex -- we won't get around ending up
> both writing the tests. If one of us writes the registrar -- the complete
> one or only a skeleton -- doesn't really matter, it will be done much
> faster than the tests. We could as well do it the other way around and
> finish the documentation and the tests and start with the registrar and
> the implementation thereafter.
I think I'd prefer the latter choice (tests first, implementation second).
Better to get a good feel for how things are supposed to work.
> However we start, we should divide the work by functionality first. So
> what functionalities do we have:
> * basic MIME string stuff (constructor/destructor, Contains(),
> SuperType()...)
> * database access (Install(), Delete(), GetAppHint(), GetIcon(),...)
> * monitoring
> * C functions (create_app_meta_mime(), get_device_icon(),
> update_mime_info())
And I would also include:
* Sniffer functionality (GetSnifferRule(), SetSnifferRule(),
CheckSnifferRule(), GuessMimeType())
> I think, I would do the monitoring part, since I can reuse some things
> from BQuery for that. The C functions (save get_device_icon()) may be
> hard to test. I would take them nevertheless. And the MIME string
> functionality. Then the main part remains for you. ;-)
> We can bargain though. :-)
That sounds good to me. :-) I'd be willing to take the sniffer functionality
too, or to leave it to whoever finishes the rest of their tasks first. Either
way is fine with me.
-Tyler
Other related posts:
