[Project_owners] Re: class vs contract ids

Pete Collins pete at mozdev.org
Fri Sep 12 11:57:03 EDT 2003


> Some of the mozilla documentation sucks big time! It is so stupid to ask JavaScript XPCOM implementors to COMPILE XPIDL just to use it!

Agree, Mozilla documentation is pitiful. Especially since there are 
litterally thousands of public interfaces w/ even more API's.  It is 
daunting to say the least. If idl interfaces were properly documented it 
would alleviate *so much* unnecessary pain. There are only a handful of 
interfaces among thousands that have usage documented in the comments.


> Why on earth would someone download 38 megs of data, extract the zillion lines of code, and try to find out about cvs tools and others, just to register your perfectly working XPCOM component with XPIDL?!?

Good question. When it comes to Mozilla it is assumed that you have an 
infinate amount of time on your hands and really love to inflict *pain* 
upon yourself.  :-)

Mozilla is ridiculously, unnecessarily, overly, complex. Simple design 
was never a priority. The barrior to entry is *extremely* high, it 
drives away many potential developers.

I honestly think that in time this will change however.

> Why isn't there simply a version for all platforms available for download?

A version of what? The xpidl compiler? That could actually be a good 
idea for a mozdev project.

> So, for example, if you have 50 people (just a small number) that like to add their own component to the mozilla browser, they ALL have to go hell week first, why is that?

Unfortunately you need an xpidl compiled xpt type library in order for 
you component to be scriptable if you want to play in the xpcom world.


--pete

-- 
Pete Collins
www.mozdev.org
www.mozdevgroup.com




More information about the Project_owners mailing list