if you do the ebay link, you have to sign up for ebay, and place a high bid on an item that you wont win........... like $5 for a laptop worth $500
2004-08-01 21429, 2004
real_
real_ is now known as real
2004-08-01 21450, 2004
roz
proxy bidders you mean?
2004-08-01 21401, 2004
real
no sign up for ebay 5 times
2004-08-01 21404, 2004
real
to get 5 refferrals
2004-08-01 21416, 2004
roz
no
2004-08-01 21422, 2004
real
how will they know
2004-08-01 21442, 2004
roz
they have to be 5 different people ..... different addresses
2004-08-01 21449, 2004
real
yea different credit cards
2004-08-01 21449, 2004
roz
i mean i suppose u could circumvent it ..........
2004-08-01 21458, 2004
real
anyways, the ipod place wouldnt have access to ebay's stuff
2004-08-01 21404, 2004
real
they wouldnt be able to see my address
2004-08-01 21410, 2004
roz
but i wouldnt really try....... its not hard to get 5 people.....
2004-08-01 21424, 2004
real
is too
2004-08-01 21417, 2004
roz
they do investigations.....
2004-08-01 21429, 2004
real
who does
2004-08-01 21451, 2004
roz
before they approve you
2004-08-01 21400, 2004
roz
the ipod place
2004-08-01 21409, 2004
real
what if i sign up my grandma, grandpa and mom and dad and brother
2004-08-01 21411, 2004
roz
and considering ebay is PAYING for your ipod.......
2004-08-01 21413, 2004
real
all same addy, same ip etc
2004-08-01 21426, 2004
roz
It says 1 per household address
2004-08-01 21431, 2004
real
bastards
2004-08-01 21450, 2004
real
have to bend over just to get an ipod
2004-08-01 21456, 2004
roz
considering ebay Pays for your ipos
2004-08-01 21458, 2004
roz
ipod
2004-08-01 21418, 2004
real
could you sign up someoen for both aol and ebay
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
roz
nope
2004-08-01 21429, 2004
real
:[
2004-08-01 21434, 2004
roz
thatd be nice :)
2004-08-01 21437, 2004
roz
i have a domain
2004-08-01 21442, 2004
roz
so i use one email for this
2004-08-01 21450, 2004
roz
and then once i get my ipod
2004-08-01 21454, 2004
roz
i can turn it off
2004-08-01 21456, 2004
roz
if i want
2004-08-01 21457, 2004
wheels has quit
2004-08-01 21403, 2004
wheels joined the channel
2004-08-01 21438, 2004
Raph0Sk8er joined the channel
2004-08-01 21409, 2004
Raph0Sk8er has left the channel
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
wheels
Heh. Mmm. Pyramid schemes. ;-)
2004-08-01 21437, 2004
wheels
ruaok: Oh, and now that you're here I can pester you. ;-)
2004-08-01 21426, 2004
MacIntire has quit
2004-08-01 21458, 2004
MacIntire joined the channel
2004-08-01 21443, 2004
roz
wheels
2004-08-01 21448, 2004
roz
its real though
2004-08-01 21454, 2004
roz
People are getting ipods
2004-08-01 21449, 2004
wheels
ruaok: So there are definitely two callbacks happening per event. Or I'm on crack.
2004-08-01 21433, 2004
ruaok
wheels: you still using 0.3.0 ??
2004-08-01 21438, 2004
ruaok is back (gone 02:28:43)
2004-08-01 21451, 2004
wheels
ruaok: Yeah, remember -- this is for stuff that'll be released in a couple of weeks.
2004-08-01 21426, 2004
wheels
ruaok: I've worked around it in my code, but was just pointing it out in case it comes up elsewhere.
2004-08-01 21411, 2004
wheels
ruaok: And a couple days ago I was confused by what actually was being returned by GetResults and when it should be called, but I think I have that clear now.
2004-08-01 21421, 2004
ruaok
cool.
2004-08-01 21438, 2004
ruaok
I think I've got some of the callback issues sorted in the CVS code for 0.4.0.
2004-08-01 21406, 2004
wheels
before 0.4 comes I'll try to compile / port it just to make sure.
2004-08-01 21418, 2004
ruaok
ok
2004-08-01 21445, 2004
wheels
But right now I'm looking at a freeze in about 2 days and not everything's working yet. :-)
2004-08-01 21458, 2004
ruaok
ick.
2004-08-01 21403, 2004
ruaok
anything I can shed some light on?
2004-08-01 21451, 2004
wheels
Well, I think I fixed it before I went out to the movies, but haven't gotten around to testing it. Just got in and dealt with finding food in the last hour.
2004-08-01 21416, 2004
ruaok
ok.
2004-08-01 21420, 2004
ruaok
drop me a line if you have issues.
2004-08-01 21429, 2004
ruaok
I'll be online spottily today.
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
somniloquy
somniloquy is now known as somnolent
2004-08-01 21408, 2004
Pipian
Hey wheels
2004-08-01 21414, 2004
Pipian
you did that other tag library right? =P
2004-08-01 21421, 2004
Pipian
"That other tag library" =P
2004-08-01 21435, 2004
wheels
guilty :-)
2004-08-01 21442, 2004
Pipian
Ah
2004-08-01 21445, 2004
Pipian
who am I kidding
2004-08-01 21452, 2004
Pipian
you're the only one that's production-quality =P
2004-08-01 21405, 2004
Pipian
But I've actually got a plan if I can get off my lazy ass and rewrite the code
2004-08-01 21417, 2004
Pipian
Switching to a more logical interface.
2004-08-01 21438, 2004
wheels just released 1.2 last week...
2004-08-01 21440, 2004
Pipian
gets and sets, and nested structs with linked lists and what not.
2004-08-01 21455, 2004
Pipian
course the thing is, nothing exists but the header file =P
2004-08-01 21412, 2004
Pipian
Lots and lots of functions... But it's probably a bit smarter and easier to use (ironically)
2004-08-01 21454, 2004
Pipian
Care to take a look at the header file, out of curiosity?
2004-08-01 21414, 2004
Pipian
So you can laugh at the pitiful competition =P
2004-08-01 21412, 2004
wheels
Sure. Likely sans laughing. :-)
2004-08-01 21426, 2004
Pipian
e-mail?
2004-08-01 21444, 2004
wheels
or web or whatever. It's all just abstract IO to me. :-)
2004-08-01 21445, 2004
Pipian
you'd probably appreciate the additional annotation that isn't present int he header.
2004-08-01 21405, 2004
wheels == wheeler [at kde.org]
2004-08-01 21440, 2004
Pipian
And thus the difference once again
2004-08-01 21456, 2004
Pipian
you aim for KDE/QT/C++ and I use Gnome/GTK/C =P
2004-08-01 21440, 2004
wheels
Well, I aim for world domination, mostly. And programming is fun too.
2004-08-01 21446, 2004
wheels
Though someone mentioned at one point that I might actually have wheeler [at gnome.org] -- I've never actually tried it though. :-)
2004-08-01 21406, 2004
wheels has a CVS account for GStreamer, though now it's on Freedesktop.org.
and once the stupid registrar stops locking it, pipian [at pipian.net]
2004-08-01 21408, 2004
wheels
Pipian: One thing that I notice quickly -- in C I tend to avoid declaring the types in the public interface unless you're really sure that they're premanent.
2004-08-01 21414, 2004
wheels
Pipian: ...since you can't add or remove anything otherwise.
2004-08-01 21435, 2004
Pipian
True
2004-08-01 21443, 2004
Pipian
Example?
2004-08-01 21413, 2004
Pipian
(Most I'm fairly certain on how they'd be used, at least the sets and gets...)
(I might not have implemented them right, but I know how it would work. The gets ideally work similar to sprintf, and the sets return success or lack of such)
2004-08-01 21429, 2004
wheels
Pipian: If you just do a forward declaration and then just pass around the pointer so long as the functions keep working you can change the underlying data structures all you want.
2004-08-01 21443, 2004
Pipian
you mean like your typedefs right at the beginning?
2004-08-01 21408, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, those are to bind it to C++ types in the background.
2004-08-01 21424, 2004
wheels
Pipian: I just cast those to C++ classes in the implementation.
2004-08-01 21428, 2004
Pipian
Clarify then?
2004-08-01 21456, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, like TagLib_Tag is actually just a pointer to TagLib::Tag (http://ktown.kde.org/~wheeler/taglib/api/classTag…) but since I obviously can't have C++ types in the interface I just created a dummy type for the pointer.
2004-08-01 21401, 2004
wheels
Pipian: So something like taglib_tag_title(TagLib_Tag *tag) gets translated to reinterpret_cast<TagLib::Tag *>(tag)->title().toCString()
2004-08-01 21426, 2004
Pipian
Ah
2004-08-01 21434, 2004
Pipian
Well how does that apply to the forward declaration part?
2004-08-01 21419, 2004
Pipian
Or am I missing something?
2004-08-01 21452, 2004
wheels
Pipian: I'm trying to remember if you need a dummy type in C -- I think so, now that I think of it.
2004-08-01 21420, 2004
wheels rarely does object oriented C, which is basically what this is.
2004-08-01 21442, 2004
Pipian
Can you maybe get to the point as I'm kinda groping through the fog trying to understand
2004-08-01 21459, 2004
wheels
I thought I did. :-)
2004-08-01 21405, 2004
Pipian
Well
2004-08-01 21417, 2004
Pipian
you said "I tend to avoid declaring the types in the public interface unless you're really sure that they're premanent."
2004-08-01 21424, 2004
Pipian
But I kinda lost you after that
2004-08-01 21432, 2004
wheels
Pipian: The point is that by hiding the type you have more flexibility while maintaining binary compatibility in the interface.
2004-08-01 21400, 2004
wheels
Pipian: If you don't expose what it contains you can change that. If you do, you can't (without breaking backwards compatibility).
2004-08-01 21433, 2004
Pipian
so basically I should redefine any points where I use those special types to something like a void pointer.
2004-08-01 21451, 2004
Pipian
instead of a pointer to the exact type.
2004-08-01 21405, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, but coming up with a dummy type at least gives you the guise of type safety.
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, and not have the structs in the header, but in the C file.
2004-08-01 21452, 2004
Pipian
I mean, the structs are pretty open now (unlike the previous ones) where I don't see much changing
2004-08-01 21433, 2004
Pipian
but in case, you would suggest I basically move the structs and create a dummy type (like your typedef struct { int dummy; }) instead...
2004-08-01 21441, 2004
wheels
Pipian: See -- let's say that you release it as is. Then you realize you forgot something important before the next release. Because previously existing code might have allocated some of your structs on the stack they can't change their size -- you can't add new members without breaking existing stuff. And normally in a library you don't want to break compatibility more than every couple of years.
2004-08-01 21419, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, that's how I would do it. You are of course free to do things most any way you like. :-)
2004-08-01 21430, 2004
Pipian
I *AM* sticking with pointers, rather than strait structs, which is a bit safer, no?
2004-08-01 21400, 2004
Pipian
But by masking it as an int, it avoids even the pretense of a bad struct
2004-08-01 21432, 2004
Pipian
but if such is the case, wouldn't you sorta lose something in the transition of a pointer to an int?
2004-08-01 21435, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Not really. Because someone could now (doesn't mean that they'd have to have a sane reason for such) could do "filedata_t foo;" -- that'll blow up if things change.
2004-08-01 21454, 2004
Pipian
So basically I'd want to mask it so that they can't make that mistake
2004-08-01 21427, 2004
Pipian
I force the use of pointers by not exposing such to the developers?
2004-08-01 21435, 2004
wheels
Yeah, basically.
2004-08-01 21450, 2004
Pipian
then why are you using double pointers?
2004-08-01 21454, 2004
Pipian
in your functions that is?
2004-08-01 21400, 2004
wheels
And of course this is just me -- and I'm mostly a C++ wanker...and I hate libs that break BC more than a few times a decade. :-)
2004-08-01 21406, 2004
Pipian
e.g. "void taglib_file_free(TagLib_File *file);"
2004-08-01 21416, 2004
Pipian
I suppose that's to use standard practice
2004-08-01 21420, 2004
Pipian
but the dummy protection
2004-08-01 21439, 2004
Pipian
is to prevent against stupid coders who don't know to use pointers from the beginning in the first place?
2004-08-01 21446, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Because for the interface I'm pretending that TagLib_File is a real type. And it's being passed by pointer. In fact it represents a real type.
2004-08-01 21418, 2004
Pipian
Even though the real type is just another pointer in disguise...
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, anything that you expose you have to take care of. Every library programmer has to be prepared for people to abuse the interface in any way that's technically possible. :-)
2004-08-01 21425, 2004
Pipian
So as I said, it's to make it normal protocol for normal programmers (who would expect to abstract as a pointer for such functions)
2004-08-01 21444, 2004
wheels
Yeah.
2004-08-01 21401, 2004
Pipian
While still allowing stupid ones to not break programs by defining a TagLib_File and then passing "&file" to the function
2004-08-01 21442, 2004
wheels
Pipian: Well, TagLib_File is completely meaningless -- that's kind of the idea.
