To avoid some linking errors

[H. S. Teoh]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 08:55:26PM +0100, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2012-10-30 18:34, Brad Roberts wrote:
> 
> >I'm all for idealistic views, but neither of those matches reality in
> >any meaningful way.  What I outlined is actually practical.
> 
> Well yes, for an already existing tool. But I see no reason why one
> wouldn't use this approach when developing a new tool. Lately, all
> my tools I write are built as libraries and a fairly thin executable
> that calls the library. Except that one can use the library in other
> tools it separates and modularize the code, easier to test and so
> on.
[...]

I have recently come to the conclusion that *all* programs should be
written as (potential) libraries with thin executable wrappers. Any
other approach will suffer from reusability issues down the road.


T

-- 
One Word to write them all, One Access to find them, One Excel to count
them all, And thus to Windows bind them. -- Mike Champion