X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:58:26 +0100 (CET)
X-X-Sender:	igor2 AT igor2priv
To:	"Levente (leventelist AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
X-Debug:	to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From:	gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] home/bkerin/geometry_module branch
In-Reply-To:	<CACwWb3Cwwe1kVwH62QOgg1yz7xwOfjW6mdiuikDJ9_iNr+8PAw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1510271154010.7137@igor2priv>
References:	<CAC4O8c_0jg9_VbT82H3P7uNi90zg=7O1Bya3ZwPW1MybP-yO9Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CACwWb3CcWkRz9Wnz+tFKTc+PkP8sZEEJ8kJX=08gM28P4RrE7w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510271032140 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
	<CACwWb3Cwwe1kVwH62QOgg1yz7xwOfjW6mdiuikDJ9_iNr+8PAw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Levente (leventelist AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

>I remember there was a movement to transform PCB to C++. I guess DJ made PCB
>ready to be compiled by a C++ compiler. DJ?
>
>Personally, I don't like C++, but I think C++ is a better tool to code a PCB
>editor application than C.


Well, that's the C++ part. I love how everybody jumps on that, while 
there was a much more important aspect in my mail went totally unnoticed:

Do we _really_ have so many, so complex geometry code in PCB that it is 
worth switching to a lib that brings half million lines of code just in 
include/?

I am not worried about disk space here. It's more about how to maintain 
software on the long run and how this is affected by code complexity and 
code size, even if we are talking about dependencies "only".

- Raw text -