Re: [Bug-wget] Big refactoring

[illusionoflife]

On Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:08:40 you wrote:
> I think the maintainer is aware that Wget's code quality is poor, and
> would welcome sweeping architectural changes; I know I would have, when
> I was maintainer.
Of course, but we can have different points of view what improvement is.
> > I fed wget source to GNU complexity and It suggested me to look at
> > parse_netrc. So I came with some ideas -- they are not so fast to
> > implement, so I want to discuss them, to not waste work.

> To my mind, there are many more monstrous functions than parse_netrc.
> And in parse_netrc's case, I'm guessing most of the code is fairly
> single-minded. In cases such as gethttp or http_loop, those functions
> "know" way too much about various subsystems, and take responsibility
> for far too much, in addition to being simply behemoth in size.
They will get their hour.
> Not to my eye. I can instantly understand what the while-loop does,
> whereas the function is a mystery to me until I actually inspect it. I
> do not believe that one- or two-line functions add value (and they
> usually detract), except in cases where the implementation might change,
> and needs to be gathered to one spot. I do not think that scanning for a
> category of character qualifies.
Okay. I would like to hear more opinions. Because for me, two-line loop and 
comment before is worse then function with speaking name. 3 lines vs 1.
> We're already inextricably tied to gnulib at this point, we might as
> well take advantage of any facilities already offered to us there.
> 
> And I suspect gnulib will have a number of facilities that may help in
> the refactoring effort anyway.
Yes. But what about list.h?

Okay, I am waiting for Guiseppe responce. Especially about creating libwget.
-- 
Best regards, illusionoflife
Contact me on address@hidden
Please, read rfc1855, if did not already.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.