diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn | 49 |
1 files changed, 48 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn b/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn index 05eb53b8..d4622d67 100644 --- a/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012, 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] [[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this @@ -97,3 +97,50 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] scatter-gather to be used with x15 <braunr> once more, i fell back on omg idl <braunr> oh, there is also flick that looks interesting + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-13-16 + + <tschwinge> braunr: By the way, regarding your recent IDL considerations + (and I too suggest using some kind of RPC generator basone on whichever + IDL) -- are you aware that for Viengoos, Neal has written a RPC stub + generator entirely in C Preprocessor macros? No idea whather that's + suitable for your case, but may be worth having a look at. + <neal> it probably isn't easy to port to Mach + <neal> genode has an ipc generator as well + <neal> which is written in a real langugage + <neal> that might be worth checking out as well + <neal> (note: I haven't followed the conversation at all.) + <braunr> i was considering using macros only too actually + <braunr> (i thought genode had switched to complex c++ templates) + <neal> dunno + <neal> I'm not up to date + <neal> macros are nice, but marshalling complicated data structures is hard + <sekon_> why implement it with just macros ?? + <neal> no lexer, no parser + <neal> no special special tools + <neal> the first are a burden + <neal> the latter is a pain + <neal> + http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=hurd/viengoos.git;a=blob;f=libviengoos/viengoos/rpc.h;h=721768358a0299637fb79f226aea6a304571da85;hb=refs/heads/viengoos-on-bare-metal + <neal> in the same directory, you there are headers that use it + <braunr> neal: cf. http://genode.org/documentation/release-notes/11.05 + <braunr> tschwinge: why do you recommend an IDL ? + <neal> braunr: What about it? + <braunr> neal: it shows the difference between the earlier ipc/rpc + interface, and the new one based only on templates and dynamic + marshalling using c++ streams + <neal> ok + <tschwinge> braunr: In my book, the definition of RPC interfaces is just + "data" in the sense that it describes data structures (exchanged + messages) and as such should be expressed as data (by means of an IDL), + instead of directly codifying it in a specific programming language. + <tschwinge> Of course, there may be other reasons for doing the latter + anyway, such as performance/optimization reasons. + <braunr> tschwinge: well, from my pov, you're justifying the use of an idl + from the definition of an rpc + <braunr> i'm not sure it makes much sense for me + <braunr> in addition, the idl becomes the "specific programming language" + <tschwinge> Well, I see it as data that has to be translated into several + formats: different programming languages' stub code. + <braunr> you could consider c the "common" language :) |