Folks, I have started 1.1, as mentioned earlier this week. One thing I want todo is, alter the way the individual parts of rrdtool (rrd_*.o) communicate with their interface code ... eg perl or rrdtool.c ...
Especially when it comes to returning data, there is a big mess. I am thinking about changing to a system where data, which is returned from a functions, comes with inline type and maybe even argument names ... For the perl bindings, this means that you would always get back a hash reference from an rrdtool call ... this makes the language bindings simpler, as they do not have to be reinvented for every new rrdtool function ... I am thinking about doing something like I did for rrd_info, for all modules ... Thoughts on this ? An other question I am thinking about is the interface for passing data to the modules ... at the moment this is done with ARGC/ARGV which is ideal for command line interfaces. But with perl and other language bindings in the picture, it might make sense to allow typed information to be passed directly to the modules ... any ideas on this ? tobi -- ______ __ _ /_ __/_ / / (_) Oetiker, Timelord & SysMgr @ EE-Dept ETH-Zurich / // _ \/ _ \/ / TEL: +41(0)1-6325286 FAX:...1517 ICQ: 10419518 /_/ \.__/_.__/_/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ee-staff.ethz.ch/~oetiker -- Unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Help mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/rrd-developers WebAdmin http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/lsg2.cgi
