A89: Re: About the Lib and Kernel question: An alternative idea to "The

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

A89: Re: About the Lib and Kernel question: An alternative idea to "The Lib Commity"


Instead of having "The Lib Commity", why not just have one person write a survey of the most
commonly used functions within a lib, and then post them here.  That is to just strip them down of
unused functions.  After we have out bare-minimum libs, then when someone has ONE function they
would like to add to a SPECIFIC lib, then another survey would be conducted here.  The survey would
ask the thoughts of the community, and if developers would SUPPORT AND USE said function.  If the
majority of the response says yes, then it shall be added, and if not, then the lib will remain
unchanged.

-Miles Raymond

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Davis <adavis@baladyne.com>
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 3:56 PM
Subject: A89: About the Lib and Kernel question:


>Ok, the debate rages.  Here's my two cents:
>
*CLIP*
>
>We have two options:
>Use libraries and don't use libraries.
>The only way it would be feasible to use libraries is if we also made a
>comittee who would approve any changes to the libraries, and ensure a
>good distribution channel for them.  They would ensure also that the
>libraries contained only commonly used functions, and that they were
>very easy and simple to use and understand.  Backwards compatability is
>necessary.  Programmers would need make clear what libraries are needed
>for their program.  They would need to keep track of which version of
>each library they used, and that they were using only approved
>libraries.
>
>I don't think anyone wants to volunteer to go to the trouble of doing
>that, and so there's a lot of talk and no comitment.  Which means that
>we'll have 10-15 different ways of doing things, and it's always going
>to be a headache for people to use programs and libs, and it's going to
>be a headache for those who get to help those who can't do it
>themselves.
>
>If we're going to standardize, let's standardize.
>
>Four groups need to be involved in this effort:
>Operators of TICALC
>Operators of TI-FILES
>Developers of DOORSOS
>Developers of PLUS SHELL
>
>Each group should pick one person to work in the comittee, and act as
>liason to their respective groups.  Those people will also act as liason
>to other users and programmers who have submissions/ideas/etc.
>
>Otherwise it will not work.  All this talk is getting us nowhere.
>
>There.  I'll step down from the soapbox now.
>
>-Adam
>adavis@baladyne.com
>
>
>"We need more eunichs programmers..."
>-PHB, from 'Dilbert'