Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#31

Post by sctb »

waruqi wrote: post #28
mises wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your colleagues all created accounts between forty and seventy minutes ago to make positive comments (except for one account that's existed for two years, but has only ever commented on this guy's stuff)? Even if this is the case, that's arguably just as much of a voting ring as bots.

Their own account, only one.

I'm sure the intentions were good, but this is outside what the community considers polite behavior. The FAQ mentions this about voting: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html.

If users aren't posting qua community members then the expectation is to provide a disclaimer.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#32

Post by tomcam »

mises wrote: post #26
waruqi wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, some simple comments from some of my colleagues and friends were identified as bot comments. I'm sorry.

So your colleagues all created accounts between forty and seventy minutes ago to make positive comments (except for one account that's existed for two years, but has only ever commented on this guy's stuff)? Even if this is the case, that's arguably just as much of a voting ring as bots.

What on earth is OP going to do with a “voting ring“ for Apache-copyrighted software?

EDIT: I am being a complete jerk tonight. Sorry again.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#33

Post by sctb »

tomcam wrote: post #32
mises wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your colleagues all created accounts between forty and seventy minutes ago to make positive comments (except for one account that's existed for two years, but has only ever commented on this guy's stuff)? Even if this is the case, that's arguably just as much of a voting ring as bots.

What on earth is OP going to do with a “voting ring“ for Apache-copyrighted software? EDIT: I am being a complete jerk tonight. Sorry again.

Please stop.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#34

Post by mises »

tomcam wrote: post #30
mises wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your colleagues all created accounts between forty and seventy minutes ago to make positive comments (except for one account that's existed for two years, but has only ever commented on this guy's stuff)? Even if this is the case, that's arguably just as much of a voting ring as bots.

The project has been around for 10 years and has almost 2500 stars on Github. The creator is Chinese but working in English as a courtesy and has used this body of code to create a number of fascinating projects, including an x86 emulator. What have you given to the programming world lately? EDIT: it was pointed out that this last comment was abusive. Sorry about that.

Good for him. I haven't known how to program very much for very long, and am a student, but so what? Am I not allowed to mention someone breaking rules? If you look above, I gave credit where credit was due, and only mentioned this near the bottom as a reply to a relevant comment. Quit white-knighting; I'm sure the author can defend himself.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#35

Post by mises »

waruqi wrote: post #28
mises wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your colleagues all created accounts between forty and seventy minutes ago to make positive comments (except for one account that's existed for two years, but has only ever commented on this guy's stuff)? Even if this is the case, that's arguably just as much of a voting ring as bots.

Their own account, only one.

Ok, thanks. Also, awesome work; this looks very useful.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#36

Post by jahewson »

waruqi wrote: post #19
torstenvl wrote: post #18

Your source files contain the following in the commented header: "Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements." Did you in fact specifically license it to the ASF? Or are you just licensing it under the Apache license?

I just used the Apache license.

Apache committer here - you’ve got the wrong header there. That one’s for source which has been committed to ASF repos under a CLA.

You want the header for non-ASF code which can be found here:

http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#37

Post by tomcam »

mises wrote: post #34
tomcam wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The project has been around for 10 years and has almost 2500 stars on Github. The creator is Chinese but working in English as a courtesy and has used this body of code to create a number of fascinating projects, including an x86 emulator. What have you given to the programming world lately? EDIT: it was pointed out that this last comment was abusive. Sorry about that.

Good for him. I haven't known how to program very much for very long, and am a student, but so what? Am I not allowed to mention someone breaking rules? If you look above, I gave credit where credit was due, and only mentioned this near the bottom as a reply to a relevant comment. Quit white-knighting; I'm sure the author can defend himself.

Duly noted. I was hot-headed. I apologize.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#38

Post by AndyKelley »

azhenley wrote: post #12

I’m working on a compiler right now that generates C. Should I use this for the generated code? (Or should I use glib, musl, or uclib?) A comparison chart would be helpful! Similar to: http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html

To solve the problem in a robust way, the C library has to be part of the target. For example on Debian Linux, glibc is the native libc. On Alpine Linux, musl is the native libc. In LLVM terminology, this is the "C ABI environment" part of the "target triple".

If your compiler supports cross compiling, you might look into the strategies that Zig does[1]. If it only supports native builds, you probably want to detect the native libc. Again here it might be useful to look at what Zig does[2].

[1]: https://ziglang.org/download/0.4.0/release-notes.html#Zig-sh... [2]: https://ziglang.org/download/0.4.0/release-notes.html#Libc-D...

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#39

Post by waruqi »

AndyKelley wrote: post #38
azhenley wrote: post #12

I’m working on a compiler right now that generates C. Should I use this for the generated code? (Or should I use glib, musl, or uclib?) A comparison chart would be helpful! Similar to: http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html

To solve the problem in a robust way, the C library has to be part of the target. For example on Debian Linux, glibc is the native libc. On Alpine Linux, musl is the native libc. In LLVM terminology, this is the "C ABI environment" part of the "target triple". If your compiler supports cross compiling, you might look into the strategies that Zig does[1]. If it only supports native builds, you probably want to detect…

That is the standard library, TBOX is just a third-party library, providing some easy-to-use cross-platform modules.

Re: Tbox: A GLib-like cross-platform C library

#40

Post by waruqi »

flukus wrote: post #15
azhenley wrote: post #12

I’m working on a compiler right now that generates C. Should I use this for the generated code? (Or should I use glib, musl, or uclib?) A comparison chart would be helpful! Similar to: http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html

> Should I use this? (Or should I use glib, musl, or uclib?) I agree that a comparison would be good, but musl and glibc are low level fundamental API's for things like printf and opening files. Glib and this are higher level libraries to build applications with. If you're building a compiler you probably want one of these, for the generated code it would depend a lot on the specifics. Edit - I'll also add that a lot…

Yes.
Post reply on HN