When someone doesn't make software that compiles correctly, it's usually because they don't make very portable software to begin with.
What I'd like to see is less dependency on little tiny libraries that change all the time and throw the entire system out of whack.
In the old days they used to make a program that interfaced with X and OSS directly and threw it in a statically linked Motif GUI. I'm not advocating this, but it seems we've been thrown to the other extreme these days.
I am a C++ developer. I shy away from, for example, wrapper libraries like gtkmm because simply not having gtkmm installed can be enough to turn people off from using my software, and I don't want to do risk that.
Can I or anyone else really be so arrogant to assume that people will find my software important enough to go through dependency hell just to use it?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get how that begs the question.
When someone doesn't make software that compiles correctly, it's usually because they don't make very portable software to begin with.
What I'd like to see is less dependency on little tiny libraries that change all the time and throw the entire system out of whack.
In the old days they used to make a program that interfaced with X and OSS directly and threw it in a statically linked Motif GUI. I'm not advocating this, but it seems we've been thrown to the other extreme these days.
I am a C++ developer. I shy away from, for example, wrapper libraries like gtkmm because simply not having gtkmm installed can be enough to turn people off from using my software, and I don't want to do risk that.
Can I or anyone else really be so arrogant to assume that people will find my software important enough to go through dependency hell just to use it?
8-)
I'm not sure I understand.
"I am a relative Linux on the desktop newbie" you are so arrogant why dont you provide us with some informative links instead ,bumperbutt
What better than to work from home, provided with two computers, and allowed to choose my own hours.