4 ms·
The quality of their code looks pretty terrible too. For starters, just look at their genMakefiles script (something of a WTF itself - y u no configure?): htt
by efaref 11y ago
The quality of their code looks pretty terrible too. For starters, just look at their genMakefiles script (something of a WTF itself - y u no configure?):
https://github.com/hackeron/live555/blob/master/genMakefiles https://github.com/hackeron/live555/blob/master/genMakefiles
It should be more like:
os=$1
modules="liveMedia groupsock ..."
for module in $modules
do
/bin/rm -f $module/Makefile
cat $module/Makefile.head config.$os $module/Makefile.tail > $module/Makefile
chmod a-w $module/Makefile
done
- chippy 11y agoI'm sure they would welcome contributors! I wonder if the classic excuse for not open sourcing software applies here - that the developer is ashamed of their source, that they think it is messy and no one will like it, applies here? Either way, one shouldn't really overtly negatively criticize - it probably wouldn't encourage such a developer if they do have that thought.
- ossreality 11y agoAre you being serious? They intentionally don't host a source repo. What could be more hostile to a potential new developer.
- jff 11y ago> y u no configure? Because autoconf is a huge disgusting mess and if you can generate your Makefiles as simply as that, for the love of God DO IT!
- admax88q 11y agoThat's a pretty weak example to argue that their code quality is poor. They didn't bother to set up a for loop, for only 8 iterations. Their version is still perfectly legible, and you don't have to worry as much about shell argument expansion, which nobody really understands fully.