[Kde-bindings] Splitting up the Smoke qt library into modules

[Arno Rehn]

On Wednesday 21 October 2009 19:36:35 Richard Dale wrote:
> While we're discussing BIC changes to the smoke libs, I wonder if it would
>  be a good idea to split up the libsmokeqt library into small libs. The
>  small size of the Smoke libs is becoming a big advantage relative to other
>  bindings libraries, and it we split them up a bit maybe the advantage
>  would  be larger still. Or is the a performance tradeoff in that searches
>  for a class or method would have to cross Smoke module boundaries more
>  often and that would slow things down? It is worth measuring somehow?
> 
> For a start I really thing we should remove QtXml and QtSql from the base
> Smoke library as nearly all dynamic languages have their own versions of
>  there which are quite likely to be better than a wrapped C++ version. For
>  example, there in no point in using the QtSql classes in Ruby because
>  Rails ActiveRecord is so much better.
Another useful thing would be to split off QtDBus, because the default binary 
Qt distribution for Windows that you get from qtsoftware.com doesn't have dbus 
support. So if we want to ship binaries, we don't have to provide seperate 
smoke versions for Qt with and without QtDBus.

-- 
Arno Rehn
arno at arnorehn.de