From: Martin Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hopefully, you just need FICL running in its own thread.
You guys really like your threads, n'est pas? I have a feeling that they'll be
too hard for me to understand, though. I like to approach things from the angle
of simplicity and debuggability. I think debuggability is really important. An
application which can't be debugged
Actually, I've been boning up on the difference between threads and processes.
From what I gather, threads use the same address space (if that's the right
terminology), whereas processes are very much a client-server model.
Processes may be inappropriate for FICL, because I think it will need access to
everything. However, the general idea of using processes seems a good one - and
this is something that I'd like the guys working on cin3 to think about.
Thinking in terms of processes seems to encourage thinness in the API - and it
might also help modularise things and think in terms of protocols. Take file
loading, for example. Does it even need to be built into Cinelerra, for
example? If you could separate it out of the main app, then you could get
benefits of independent testing from a command line - because it's a
client-server relationship. And if there's a bug in the file loader, it can't
bring down the whole app. Good things seem to flow from the idea of using
processes.
Just my 2c. Please don't flame me if my technical details are wrong - I freely
admit I'm new to all this.
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/
