I hope that whatever solutions we come up with to handle the too-many-dependencies problem don’t stifle people’s motivation to create and share new packages. It’s not a given that useful libraries are going to exist. Too much friction and people will just stop sharing code.
-
-
What on *earth* are you talking about? Code sharing is easy in C: https://gist.github.com/ianloic/91c8c2784ea9f9db1ab07afbe1b3cf7b … If you want to distribute the code then the dependencies are automatically picked up by your packaging system (at least if you're using normal Linux stuff).
-
Misses the point. The number of people who could use those generic string routines >> the number of people who have need for fontconfig. But because those routines are dropped into fontconfig and not their own library, most potential users won’t use them.
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think there is a good (or bad) reason for it: in C you end up rolling so many things yourself that the actual interface to a library ends up being much wider than it should be
-
stuff looks and seems reusable, and it should be, but then it's just too difficult because there are so many little things that C programmers don't agree on how to do. so everyone re-rolls everything and here we are
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think there's a vitally important distinction between "code sharing" and "dependencies". The former being more about writing good APIs and having good primitives in the language. And the latter is far more difficult a problem. E.g. consider this sharing. https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/wiki/plot_var_example …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.