Hi Johannes and R.L, Please excuse my delay to answer. Finally I found some time to address this. On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 05:25:49PM +0100, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
Hi Jorge,
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:56:47AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
Another important point is that we're not working with GTK1 anymore, but with FLTK2 (antialiasing, UTF-8, statical linking in 700KB, less dependencies, etc). We have an advanced prototype. This is important for potential developers.
We're looking for interested developers to work on Dillo. This is also key to the success of the project. This is the kind of developer that not only sends patches but that contributes to the core of it.
Sometime ago I asked in this list for interested developers and got only one answer for a "patch-developer" so to speak.
I'm a long time dillo user and have some experience with fltk1 and fltk2 from my small spare time projects. I would be happy to contribute to the dillo project but my time will be limited...
"R.L. Horn" wrote:
Sometime ago I asked in this list for interested developers and got only one answer for a "patch-developer" so to speak.
Actually, I volunteered some time back and never got a response. I haven't fiddled with FLTK development, but I reckon I could pick it up in a week or so.
Thanks for commiting some time to Dillo! PLease let me know a rough estimate of how much time could this be. Just to have an idea of what kind of task you both can work in based on your expertise and available time. At this moment, much of Dillo is quite similar to what we had in 0.8.x series. The main differences are: - Dw was ported to C++ (some new capabilities, similar API). - HTML/text/script parser was ported to C++. - The Concomitant callback chain was redesigned for simplicity. (Now, instead of one CCC branch per task, an anhanced universal branch handles Dpi, HTML, text and images). - Bug fixes/injections ;-) A great thing is that Dw is well documented (Doxygen), it has a testbed, it's isolated from Dillo and it can be studied comfortably. OTOH, there's a lot of middle/minor work to be done to complete its implementation. If I get your time availability it would be easier to plan with Sebastian what to suggest you to work on. Thanks a lot for your commitment. May thy example be followed by the listeners! :-) -- Cheers Jorge.-
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
- Dw was ported to C++ (some new capabilities, similar API). - HTML/text/script parser was ported to C++.
I'm sorry to hear that. If the plan is a general switchover to C++, I'll have to back out. I don't do C++, Java, etc. for free -- it's just not worth the aggravation. Hell, I've just discovered that FLTK2 (r5642) won't even build with my current compiler/linker combination. Sorry, life's too short for this kind of crap.
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 06:52:55PM -0600, R.L. Horn wrote:
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
- Dw was ported to C++ (some new capabilities, similar API). - HTML/text/script parser was ported to C++.
I'm sorry to hear that. If the plan is a general switchover to C++, I'll have to back out. I don't do C++, Java, etc. for free -- it's just not worth the aggravation.
Hell, I've just discovered that FLTK2 (r5642) won't even build with my current compiler/linker combination. Sorry, life's too short for this kind of crap.
Believe it or not, I have a similar feeling about C++, and try to avoid it as much as I can. Now, FLTK2 is a good toolkit (trying to use a small subset of C++'s bloat), and there were parts of Dillo that needed to be ported to it, but is mainly as C-ish as it was before. Although I still have to try to convince Sebastian to a smallest C++ feature set in Dw. Not much of his fault, maybe he didn't have an option, with C++ you have the curse of templates. -- Cheers Jorge.-
participants (2)
-
Jorge Arellano Cid -
R.L. Horn