[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Distributed Objects overkill?

From: Richard Frith-Macdonald
Subject: Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 06:22:26 +0000

On Tuesday, November 4, 2003, at 05:39 AM, Alex Perez wrote:

This article was posted to Apple's cocoa-dev mailing list. Perhaps someone here would care to clarify for the folks there why this is or is not possible, and if the "laziness" is really the issue, as the poster claims. Here is a chance to fight the FUD.

I can't see anything in the quote about 'laziness' ... but the statements about NeXTs DO may well be correct ... I've never heard otherwise, and I see no reason why endianness should be a problem. Perhaps word size might be a problem in the NeXT code ... I don't think they ever did portable DO for a 64-bit processor. However, there were some very good people at NeXT, and it wouldn't surprise me if they had allowed for communications between machines with different word sizes too.

The stuff about different protocols and archive format/content is certainly correct. NeXT/Apples protocol and format were (and as far as I know still are) proprietory and undocumented and would have to be reverse engineered. A few people have volunteered to try to do that in the past ... and given up. Think about how many years it took people to come up with good filters to read ms-word documents!

On Nov 3, 2003, at 7:08 AM, Public Look wrote:

There has never been an issue with NeXT's distributed objects and endianness as far as I know.

NeXT's DO certainly worked seamlessly between
Openstep Mach on 68000
Openstep Intel
Openstep Enterprise/PDO running on top of Windows NT on Intel
Openstep Mach SPARC
Openstep running on top of Solaris SPARC
Openstep running on top of HP-UX on PA-RISC
I have foggy memories of possibly using NeXT's "Portable Distributed Objects" (PDO) on DEC Alpha.

The protocol deals with endianess internally. It probably just standardizes on one endian convention and automatically converts from the wrong one.

What has NEVER worked in distributed object between Openstep and Gnustep. GNUstep uses slightly different protocols and more importantly, the systems archive objects differently. DO between Openstep/Cocoa and GNUstep definitely does NOT work unless something has changed in the last year or so.
cocoa-dev mailing list | address@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

Alex Perez
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it."
--Thomas Jefferson

Discuss-gnustep mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]