1994.02.18 19:31 "Re: 'b' and 'l' versus 'M' and 'I' -- libtiff++? (really what's up with libtiff)", by Sam Leffler
It has been pointed out that 'b' is used on some computers to signify binary mode (as opposed to text mode). As a result is has been suggested that 'M' and 'I' are used instead.
But since the mode string isn't actually passed to fopen but parsed by the library it doesn't really matter if 'b' is used in another context. You can ofcourse make your own private modifications and implement 'M' and 'I' checking.
Yes, I noted that it wasn't really all that important, and in retrospect I'm sorry I bothered to mention it. "Never mind."
I was thinking of adding '#ifdef NO_READ_SUPPORT' and '#ifdef NO_WRITE_SUPPORT' to all modules to make the library smaller in cases where only writing is needed. Any comments?
I think that would be a nice feature, however I would rather see the library designed such that compile-time switches are not needed (at all); I don't like building library variants. For separating read/write support this could be done by having different entry points, such that you only pull in the support you actually use. Anyway, Sam commented a while back:
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1993 08:46:28 PDT
... Right now the code
has reached its "life expectancy" and putting much effort into it is
not really worth it. Any future major effort will almost certainly
be done in C++...
I gather he is not likely to want to integrate even "simple" changes into a new master release. Making diffs available through this list (posting if small else via ftp) may be a reasonable way for multiple people to maintain/extend/improve the existing library, but it could get messy. Sam, what's up with you and libtiff?
I am still working on libtiff. I was tring to get a new version together before I left on my sabbatical, but ran out of time. I will also work with the IJG to insure that the forthcoming JPEG-in-TIFF spec is supported by libtiff as soon as possible. As much as possible, however, I am trying to avoid radically altering the library in its present form because I neither have the time nor the interest in working with the existing code. My time restrictions also apply to following the discussions that go on on this mailing list. There's been a lot of recent activity that looks to be good, but I haven't had the time to carefully read most of it or to respond.
Folks may not realize it, but the TIFF software is unrelated to my "real work" and as such it gets attention when I have spare time and enough interest to delve into software that's over 6 years old.