Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.175; envelope-from=memwallet.info@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ig0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:27:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKzHBKnFHnc5+b0kU9=a0iG3HCU=mwx71DbQPk53Y91aPhA7eA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mem Wallet <memwallet.info@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e84ca38944d0508da778f
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoind as a library
Precedence: list

--90e6ba6e84ca38944d0508da778f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Two minor observations:

DecodeBase58Check is listed as inline, but isnt actually inlined in the
header.
This makes it both non-present in libbitcoin_common.a and unavailable
to other code that would use libbitcoin_common.a as a library. (bug?)

In general, the hierarchy of tools is poor/weak. for example base58.h could
be a fairly
independent low level math/string library, but it includes caddress, which
requires chainparams, and makes the whole dependency tree quite involved...


Is there an intention that the various internal libraries could/should
be strengthened and heirachicalized such that they would be suitable for
3rd party development of bitcoin related services and tools, or is that not
a goal, and some other project would have to fill such a role ?

--90e6ba6e84ca38944d0508da778f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><br></div>Two minor observations:<br><=
br>DecodeBase58Check is listed as inline, but isnt actually inlined in the =
header.<br></div>This makes it both non-present in libbitcoin_common.a and =
unavailable<br>to other code that would use libbitcoin_common.a as a librar=
y. (bug?)<br><br></div>In general, the hierarchy of tools is poor/weak. for=
 example base58.h could be a fairly<br>independent low level math/string li=
brary, but it includes caddress, which <br>requires chainparams, and makes =
the whole dependency tree quite involved...<br><br><br></div><div>Is there =
an intention that the various internal libraries could/should<br>be strengt=
hened and heirachicalized such that they would be suitable for<br></div><di=
v>3rd party development of bitcoin related services and tools, or is that n=
ot<br>a goal, and some other project would have to fill such a role ?<br></=
div><br><br></div>

--90e6ba6e84ca38944d0508da778f--