Even one copy of source code is simply absurd.

Making a separate library is not absurd. There was a beginning of a separate
library in the Makefile.in, which I dropped, but it could be revived and
completed. But I'm not convinced that even that is necessary or advisable.

============================================
Michael Gogins
gogins at pipeline period com
Irreducible Productions
CsoundVST, an extended version of Csound for programming music and sound
Available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/csound/
============================================


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anthony Kozar" 
To: "Csound Developers Discussion List" 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 10:49 PM
Subject: [CSOUND-DEV:4046] Re: Csound 5 utilities


> I'd noticed the same thing when I was trying to get Cscore working again.
>
> Instead of linking with all of Csound, why don't you just pull the
duplicate
> code out into a separate file and #include it as necessary.  Then there
> would be only one copy and minimum bloat too.
>
> Anthony Kozar
> anthony.kozar@utoledo.edu
>
>
> On 2/6/04 10:26 PM, Michael Gogins etched in stone:
>
> > In the course of making a Makefile.am for Csound 5, I have found that
some
> > (most?) utility programs contain source files that almost, but not
quite,
> > duplicate files in Csound proper.
> >
> > Unless I hear very strenuous objections indeed, I am going to get rid of
all
> > the duplicate code. One person who is intimately familiar with the code
can
> > safely maintain the two copies of the code, but if more than one person
> > starts paying very much attention to this code, the duplicate files are
> > begging for trouble.
> >
> > What I am going to do is use the code in Csound proper. The main() in
the
> > utility program will simply link with the Csound API library. For
example,
> > in the dnoise main(), dnoise(argc, argv) will be called.
> >
> > I can see that some of the utility programs will link with all the
Csound
> > API library, and others will not. I am aware that this will make some or
all
> > of the utility programs larger. In my view, this is a small price to pay
for
> > avoiding this set of hacks. Possibly the scheme to have two Csound
> > libraries, one for Csound hosts and one for utility programs, can be
used.
>

ONE file with the code in it.  NO "copies".

That's what I meant.

On 2/6/04 11:26 PM, Michael Gogins etched in stone:

> Even one copy of source code is simply absurd.

>> Instead of linking with all of Csound, why don't you just pull the duplicate
>> code out into a separate file and #include it as necessary.  Then there
>> would be only one copy and minimum bloat too.