On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
Your lines are wrapping at something like 84 columns....
> "Jon M. Taylor" wrote:
>
> > > Hmm. I don't know whether that is of *any* relevance. But I'm studying the
> > > CORBA architecture, especially its historical evolution. CORBA is a middleware
> > > architecture to provide a set of 'services', encapsulating all the nasty details
> > > of OS dependence, transport protocols, etc.
> > > The more CORBA evolves, the more it becomes clear that users might want to
>explicitely
> > > control low level features, such as messaging strategies, concurrency
>strategies, etc.
> > > Therefor, there are more and more specifications added to CORBA which allow to
> > > control these features in terms of 'policies', 'interceptors' (some sophisticated
> > > form of callbacks), etc.
> >
> > CORBA is also slow - WAY too slow for a system layer such as GGI.
> > We are avoiding C++ altogether because of performance issues, so CORBA
> > seems to be out |->.
>
> nah, you totally misunderstood me. I'm definitely not suggesting that you use CORBA.
> What should that be good for ?
Well, GGI is currently missing the notions of state persistence
and location transparency. I was working on LibGGI3D for a while to try
to address some of those issues with a lightweight object-encapsulation
system for ggi_visuals which would enable the construction of directed
rendering graphs. I haven't worked on it for a while, but the need is
still there.
> Rather, I'm thinking about the architectural similarities,
> *beside* all the differences. As I said, in both cases you have to insulate some
>implementation
> specific stuff (or in GGI h/w specific stuff), yet allow control over some of them
>through
> a unified set of 'properties', 'interceptors', etc.
Yes, we need much more high-level management of resource-bound
attributes and the ability to control the activation, parameters,
notification event callbacks, etc of those attributes. We don't actually
do much with resources at all now, other than using them as lock
objects....
> So, all I'm thinking about is whether GGI could be extended in such a way that it
>presents
> in some form a set of strategy choices to the user, and let him decide which to use.
> That can be through a set of flags or whatever means.
Like choosing the rendering quality options in Quake? |->
Jon
---
'Cloning and the reprogramming of DNA is the first serious step in
becoming one with God.'
- Scientist G. Richard Seed
