On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Brandon wrote: > I totally agree with the point that a massively bloated library is less > good than a simple library. That's why I like XML-RPC. It's the simplest > thing available and will work fine for our purposes.
It's superior if you want to write Freenet libraries in scripting languages that make it hard to implement something like LocalServ. But for C, C++, and Java, it only makes things harder, IMHO. > > So stick to simple protocols, even if that means that the latest > > CORBA-doodad can't automagically embed Freenet. > > Most things support XML-RPC so most things should be able to embed it. Of > course if you had to talk to Freenet via CORBA you could just plugin in a > CORBA interface for yourself. But I think the best choice for the > "standard" client protocol is XML-RPC because it's so simple and tiny. Most things don't use fancy stuff like XML or CORBA. Most clients will use a Freenet library that handles higher-level stuff like redirects automatically, and will never even see any XML. But if you think that implementing client libraries in weird scripting languages is important, then using a standard protocol is a good choice. Personally, I'd rather use LocalServ and write really small code. -- Mark Roberts mjr at statesmean.com _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
