Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2017 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On 05/01/2017 01:05 AM, Chris Sherlock wrote:
On 28 Apr 2017, at 8:22 pm, Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com> wrote:
i really don't see the point of this.  the tools module is primarily a toxic waste dump, and 
distributing the toxic waste across all the other
modules does not look like an improvement to me.  better to remove the toxic waste from our git 
repo and dump it in some landfill where nobody lives, or at least nobody that we know :)

That does seem to be the consensus :-) however, at least one of the classes is used extensively 
through our codebase, and I'm not sure what would replace it.., I'm speaking of SvStream.

Whilst it's not useless or deprecated, I wonder if it was placed in tools because nobody was quite 
sure where else to put it?

I think you're looking at it from the wrong angle. Long ago, tools used to be the natural choice where to put generic low-level stuff (it being the lowest module in the hierarchy). That's how many of the tools include files came about.

Things have changed since them. Some parts of tools don't make much sense any more, some parts are known to be so bad that they shouldn't be used any more, some parts have been superseded by facilities elsewhere (where that "elsewhere" is often just due to historical reasons, too), etc. And some parts (like SvStream) are likely to stay with us for quite some time still.

So while it makes sense to clean away parts that are no longer needed and have good replacements elsewhere, it IMO makes no sense to e.g. move existing functionality from tools to o3tl.

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.