On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 12:34:51PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> Of course Adam, you may find that people want you to expose a plugin
> mechanism for things like FProxy, FCP, and XML-RPC, so that these do not
> have to endure the additional FCP parsing overheads for FProxy and
> XML-RPC.
I really don't think that the FCP parsing times are too great -
certainly not compared to the network lag times. If people want
stunning performance they can use FCP or FNP. The cost of maintaining
all the different interfaces (in terms of time, bugs and
incompatibilites) is a lot. Better if FNP#2, FNP#3 (XML-RPC for wrose
maybe) and FProxy are in 1 proxy. Less node code - more shared code =
less bugs etc etc.
> If so, you might be better-off doing this now, and writing
> XML-RPC as a plugin. Ditto for FProxy.
If people really want to write plugins for wrose the client code is
separate from the fcp code and they can use the current plugin interface.
AGL
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.
PGP signature
