On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:27:33 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>>> Yep, and you can see the effects of this with some poorly written
>>>> extensions.  The GNOME developers *really* need to harden the error
>>>> handling a bit more.
>>>
>>> Tell me about it. Right about the time they start *documenting* how
>>> this stuff is meant to work. (I still find it astonishing that this
>>> much code has been written given that there is NO DOCUMENTATION!)
>>
>> Well, I'm sure there's some, and it's not the source code, but I
>> haven't needed to write an extension yet, so I haven't really gone
>> looking for it yet.
>>
>> But if I were, I might be inclined to look at the code for another
>> extension to see how it does it.
> 
> ...and thus, if one person finds a flawed but superficially working way
> to do something, everybody will copy their mistake. Because there's no
> documentation on the "correct" way to do it.

I don't debate that, but I would tend to use code from a well-thought-of 
extension.  You can get some credibility from the GNOME developers.

> Even then, I'm surprised this much code has been written. I spent
> literally *weeks* trying to comprehend the code of several extensions I
> looked at. To this day I literally cannot work out how the hell it
> actually works. It's just SO COMPLICATED to do even the most trivial
> task with this stuff...

I do agree that better documentation is needed, along with sample code.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message