Egregoros · Phoenix Framework

Post

Remote status

Context

witch_t *navi

i really hate this idea that every non-trivial struct in c must be an opaque heap allocated pointer because people can't trust their users to read documentation, or what?

abi stability is another topic, and that one is more valid of a reason, but i'd still say it's not that hard, use sonames properly -- but if you *know* the struct definition will be changing a lot, then it's fair (but consider structuring your api differently, be modular and rely less on one single big struct type)

Haelwenn /элвэн/

@lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me remote

@navi Makes me wonder where that culture comes from because for example it's a rather normal thing in Elixir to have the caller fill the structure. Like I wonder if it's a OOP thing where it's private struct and an annoying pile of get/set functions.

witch_t *navi

@navi@social.vlhl.dev remote

@lanodan it really feels like oop-isms, getters and setters everywhere pains me (not to mention how it now has runtime costs for little reason)

Hugo 雨果

@whynothugo@fosstodon.org remote

@navi @lanodan The mian advantage is that you can change a getter from “return an internal field” to “return a field in an internal structure” or to computed property, all while maintaining API compatibility.

The runtime cost is real, and ideally you want the language/compiler to optimise the “it’s just an internal field” case.

Haelwenn /элвэн/

@lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me remote

@whynothugo @navi Well… sadly if compiler would optimise then you'd get API compatibility sure, but not ABI compatibility, which is a rather common concern.

Although a concern that I often feel like is a third-party binaries for somewhat isolationist distros and proprietary software, as otherwise bumping soname ABI is typically fine.

witch_t *navi

@navi@social.vlhl.dev remote

@lanodan @whynothugo bumping soname would trigger gentoo's @preserve-rebuild mechanism (or SLOT `=` deps), and basically any binary distro watches soname and trigger reverse-dep rebuilds

stable abi is nice, but it's only really a "problem" when you can't rebuild, aka, with proprietary software

Haelwenn /элвэн/

@lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me remote

@navi @whynothugo Also an issue with particularly annoying distros like Debian that have a pretty high threshold of entry for packages, where even experienced admins that know how to create packages aren't doing them. (Likely due to lack of community repo, although there's been few attempts)
So you also end up with quite few FOSS projects providing pre-built packages or even non-packaged binaries to fill the void.

Replying to @lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me

witch_t *navi

@navi@social.vlhl.dev remote

@lanodan @whynothugo

i remember people downloading .deb and .rpm out of a developer's website and it was painful

last i heard of community repos for debian, they were trying to copy the AUR and MAKEPKG files -- this... says something about debian's recipe format

Replies

No replies yet.