[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New libquran architecture and features

On 7/23/07, nabil ben khalifa <nabil_benkhalifa at yahoo dot fr> wrote:
Assalamo alaykom,

A discussion has began about the future of libquran:
architecture, features, language bindings, ...  but I
think it was in the wrong thread (Quran project
maintainer) so I opend this thread with a clear
subject to discuss these matters.

-- Mohammad DAMT <mdamt at gnome dot org> wrote :
> I've put something in my mind in the wiki page:

Well I think that it is a good beginning but some
ideas need to be more clear, for example what do you
mean by binary xml files ?

--- "A.Haq Abbad" <haqman at gmail dot com> wrote:
> As for speex, last I checked, it had very poor
> quality! aint ogg alone good enough?

At contrary, I think that speex is the best choice as
it is a codec for voice as is the quranic recitation.

I'm happy with speex ;D, as if i programmed on it before! its all new to me, sorry.

--- "A.Haq Abbad" <haqman at gmail dot com > wrote:
> Not sure if you are starting from scratch or carry
> on with the current one!
> if from scratch, consider C++, as it brings many
advantages :D in
> my opinion of course.

--- Ahmed Ghoneim <ahmed dot ghoneim at gmail dot com> wrote :
> I also think we should stick with C, as the extra
> fire power (and complexity) of C++ is not needed for
a project this
> size,  plus C being a smaller/simpler language with
standard that
> you can get 20 people to agree on, makes it easier
to port from
> platform to another

Well I agree totally with Ahmed Ghoneim, we should
stick to the C language and he gave the arguments as
why to do so.

No problem, I'll be 1 of the 20 people then :)

--- "A.Haq Abbad" <haqman at gmail dot com> wrote:
> Plugin sounds good, yet I have no idea how it will
> be like.

Are plugins really needed ? why we don't offer
compilation options so that everyone can compile
libquran with the adequate options for his platform ?

Compile? not sure, it depends on libquran target, i.e. developers, users ... etc
However, if compile option, then we can always provide different flavours of libquran??? or it  cannot be.

I have another suggestion: instead of using xml or
binary files, why we don't use to databases instead to
store quranic data (text, tafsir, ...) which will
facilitate access to data and searching of info
within.  We can use sqlite for example which is a very
light and portable sql database based in files, what
do you think ?

This question has no simple answer, as if your target is Deskop, then its OK to use any,
if portable device? mobile phones, pda's etc, will they work nicely with sqlite, I know its lite, but not that lite to my knowlege.
I cannot say anything about this, as everything has its advantages and disadvantages! perhaps we need to start voting :D. my vote will be : Binary, or sqlite ... not xml, as it serves nicly to be a source, not in the final thing (its quran, not nice to be modified!..)

Nabil Ben Khalifa

Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail
Developer mailing list
Developer at arabeyes dot org