[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server

From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:22:46 +0200

On 7/15/05, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

> Well, again this is an issue that the only people qualified to comment
> on are those that have actually experience with Windows, MSVC and the
> JPEG libraries, and it is likely that pretty much the only person
> qualified to comment on it is the one posting the questions in the
> first place.  So nobody else chimes in.  It basically becomes largely
> a one-man show of one person who keeps a record of his doubts and
> struggles in public.

I think you're right on the general principle. But I'm talking of one
specific problem (the JPEG/filehandle issue) that does not match your

  - The main issue I'm expecting to hear comments about is *legal*,
not technical: whether the code from a file in jpeglib can be used or
not (there are reasons why I think it could, that I did explain in my
original message).
 - The change is not Windows-specific: it would affect every platform
(in trivial ways, in fact).
 - The fix is not Windows-specific: the code has no Windows
particularities of any kind, it's just a relatively straight change to
call FILE*-oriented read/write functions directly instead of relying
on the ones embedded in the image library.
  - If the decision of the legal issue is that the code in my patch
can not be used (because it is lifted from a file in jpeglib), I can
no re-code it (I think) because I'm "tainted" by having read and
copied the original. Someone else should have to write three or four
functions, no more than twenty or thirty lines of code.

So, any kind of input on this issue, and pointers on how to approach
it to push it to a conclusion, would be very appreciated.

> It is does
> no harm asking for second opinions and documenting what you are doing,
> but expecting continuous feedback for something where others are at
> least equally out of depth is a recipe for misery, and stumbling
> through foreign code is misery, anyway.

Of course. In fact, the problem with library image crashes consisted
of two similar, though unrelated, issues: one with jpeglib, the other
with pnglib. I asked about both, and after a while I installed the
pnglib patch, because it had no legal implications. So I'm fully aware
that sometimes the answer to Warnock's Dilemma is: "6) Some people
understood the question just fine, but had no insight to share, for
whatever reason". I have no problem committing the code in this case,
and I've done quite a few times.

My comment about feeling a little left out is about the *other* cases,
the ones where the feedback *is* important. That's why I've brought
this up about... what, four times now?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]