Re: [dev] iim - ii improved and rewriten

From: Ivan Kanakarakis <>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 00:11:20 +0200

On 8 January 2013 23:28, Nico Golde <> wrote:
> Hi,
> * Ivan Kanakarakis <> [2013-01-08 14:52]:
>> On 8 January 2013 14:02, Nico Golde <> wrote:
>> > * Anselm R Garbe <> [2013-01-08 12:50]:
>> >> On 8 January 2013 03:05, Ivan Kanakarakis <> wrote:
>> >> > I've been tweaking ii's code lately, mainly cleaning it up
>> >> > and fixing a couple of things I noticed, but ended up
>> >> > rewriting it from scratch.
>> >> > Thus resulted iim[0] (name given by ^7heo on irc - thanks)
>> >>
>> >> Why not contributing to the official ii project instead? I guess nion
>> >> would be ok with this.
>> >>
>> >> Please check with nion.
>> >
>> > As mentioned on irc, send patches ;)
>> yep, I have to study for an exam but hopefully will find some time do it
> Cool!
>> [offtopic]
>> the _obvious reasons_ though, are not so obvious to me.
>> suckless is supposed to be about software that sucks less,
>> software that is simple, easy to understand and easy to hack.
>> if a piece of software is less complex than a suckless project
>> then the suckless people should want to have it.
> Yep makes sense, even though it should not be the goal of the project to
> evaluate every single replacement for suckless software and assign a suckless
> score.
>> otherwise suckless is just like every other organization that
>> builds their own tools and ties themselves so hard to those
>> tools that forgets why that organization was created in the first
>> place, thinking that nothing else can ever work as good
> I totally agree on this general assumption. I fail to see how it applies to
> something which sucks technically exactly the same. In this particular case,
> it's mostly about personal taste and reducing a couple of lines of code for
> something that is already significantly reduced compared to the pieces of
> software that are seen as bloat.
> Don't get me wrong, I think I already explained this on IRC. I am not opposed
> to the idea of having something like iim. It's certainly a fun project to hack
> on. But I am against reinventing the wheel for the sake of it.
> Of course you can argue that iim sucks less than ii because it's parsing is
> simpler (I don't think it makes sense to argue with SLOC for two such small
> projects), but that brings up the natural question of why not patching that
> instead of replacing something completely.

I'm not arguing anything! :P that's why I put the offtopic label there,
so as not to relate it to ii/iim. And I am not implying anything here.
It was a general view of mine, on how things should work and how
I would like suckless to behave when a new project comes up that
tries to suck less.

ie, you talked about dwm and that it has been forked/mimicked many times.
what I said stems from my impression that when suckless was presented
with any of those clones everyone started trolling and comparing that project
to dwm, like trying to make the author drop the project. I've very rarely seen
any encouraging reply or something in the lines of
"good work dude, it may not suck less than dwm but it's good to have
 more projects that try to be minimal or suck less out there."
and let me say this one more time: it is just my impression, I may be wrong.

> I'm not trying to pull a Jörg Schilling here, I just don't get your thinking
> of how free software and contributions in this ecosystem work.

sharing ideas, patching, forking when needed and rewriting in a few cases.

I did rewrite ii -> iim because changing the way parsing was done was
changing the general design of ii. I think it was easier to rewrite it than
change it in place, and it also revealed things that can go wrong (ie no.4)
that I believe I would not have seen by making a few changes in-place.
It is a lot easier to see how ii is structured and find-and-fix those culprits
and as you said, as I said (:D) I am willing to send in patches once I find
the time for it.

anyway, I hope I did not annoy anyone, I just found cause on what you said
to express my thoughts for the community, not the software or ii and iim.

> Cheers
> Nico
> --
> Nico Golde - - - GPG: 0xA0A0AAAA

Ivan c00kiemon5ter V Kanakarakis  >:3
Received on Tue Jan 08 2013 - 23:11:20 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jan 08 2013 - 23:24:02 CET