Em Monday, 13 de June de 2011, às 15:42:37, Ville M. Vainio escreveu: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Doing high performance IPC has so far required a roll-your-own > >> approach [...] > >> Perhaps Qt could provide such a thing as a module? > > > > Why would it? What's wrong with using the non qt solutions out there? > > Well, Qt (in the extended sense of the word) already provides Service > Framework. It also provides "blessed" DBUS binding. So such things are > not entirely out of scope.
D-Bus also moves out as an add-on module.
> My preferred approach would be to rewrite Service Framework to use a
> low latency solution. This was suggested before and shot down, but
> that transpired before feb 11 and open governance so some things may
> be different now.
SFW can have more than one backend, that's fine.
In the post-Feb 11 world, we will focus more on Linux than before, meaning we
don't need an abstraction layer to an abstraction layer.
> > Also i know at least 5 solutions _with_ Qt, existing built from the
> > community. Maybe it makes more sense to raise awareness for such
> > community projects.
>
> Agreed. I'm not particularly interested in bloating Qt - but pointing
> at a fast way to do IPC as a "Qt endorsed" solution might be a good
> idea.
It will be as Qt-endorsed as anything else by being a Qt Addon.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
