Invitation for technical discussion on next-generation Thunderbird
ben.bucksch at beonex.com
Sun Apr 23 13:17:48 UTC 2017
Magnus Melin wrote on 23.04.2017 13:44:
> desktop application with no C++ at all.
Aside from OS integration (e.g. "default email app" etc.), where do you
see the need for C++ code?
> Without looking too much on that proposal, it strikes me that if it's
> a good idea, why isn't that standard?
With that argument, we would never do anything new. Ever. Because if it
was a good idea, it would already have been done. So, per se, all new
ideas are bad.
The basic ideas of JS Collections are a already standard in other
languages, like Java and C#, to various degrees. They are not a standard
in JS, because there is no standard library, and there is no coherent
community yet (it's just now forming on npm, I think), so everybody
works with arrays. Not because it's good, but because they have nothing
> If the collections were observable
First, just because a collection is observable doesn't mean it's
writable by the consumer. These are distinct qualities. More importantly:
Observers are a cornerstone of MVC (Model/View/Controller), the
separation of logic and UI. I am planning to use design patterns and
other good code design practices throughout the application. They are
crucial in making the application readable, maintainable and
future-proof. That's for me an important part of the rewrite, to make
Thunderbird code (not just the platform) future-proof and easy to adapt
to new ideas and circumstances. The current Thunderbird is not at all. I
want to make a Thunderbird for the next 20 years, not just for today.
More information about the tb-planning