[Corelinux-develop] Caution

[Frank V. C. <fr...@co...>]

In a brief ping, Christophe mentioned the KDE-2 mini-declaration idl
capability.

I would like to put a flag of caution up for a second to consider a few
things in regards to the Library Loader.

The libcorelinux (libcl++.so) should contain:

1. The mimimal framework component abstractions (currently the Library
Load design)
2. Some level of behavior that will be common across all possible domain
specializations.
3. A first level derivation of the abstraction to types for dynamic
shared function libraries, with the exception of defining actual
ExecutionObjectDefinitions.

But realize that:

The actual ExecutionObjects and respective definitions is in the
solution space of the application domain. It is up to "them" to define
what a ExecutionObjectDefinition IS, what it contains, and so on. It is
impossible for us to do that for them, after all we don't know which
libraries they will be using. Of course I will be providing an example
that leverages the framework, but I won't be needing a parser or grammar
for that.

Now, when we (CoreLinux++) publish OUR frameworks, it is extremely
likely that we will make heavy use of the Library Load mini-framework to
facilitate the component architecture. At this point, a parser for
definition interchange is a likely requirement. And IDL is clearly a
very suitable fit specifically for ExecutionObjectDefinitions, but just
as clearly useless in any other type library (images, etc.).

Thoughts? Anyone?

-- 
Frank V. Castellucci