[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [DotGNU]DotGNU policies

From: James Michael DuPont
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]DotGNU policies
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:26:44 -0800 (PST)

--- Peter Minten <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> in order to prevent future conflicts about the course of DotGNU I
> propose the
> following policies. I hope that if the policies are good the SC will
> make them
> official. If that is the case then the policies cannot be changed
> without
> permission from the SC (they are cast in stone until the SC pulls out
> the rock
> drill).

Well these are suggestions that require work to implement,
the SC can only suggest them, but I think we need to make the plan to
implement them. I can only say that I agree with you.

> * DotGNU shall be downward compatible with .NET
>   Applications that run on .NET should run on DotGNU, the reverse
> does not need
> to be true.

That means we can expand on the bytecode ops, the class libs, the
reflection libraries. We can provide creative and useful functions also
as internalcalls in the pnet runtime. 

> * All essential DotGNU code shall be accessible from any language
> provided it
> can access functions written in C.
>   Compatibility is our business. True compatibility does not mean
> assimilation
> (compiling everything down to one bytecode) but integration
> (providing ways to
> access stuff from one language from another). 

Also it means making the bytecode interpreters accessible.

> C is the standard,
> about all
> languages can call C functions, thus C if it can be called using C
> functions
> it's compatible about all languages. 

Look at swig, it generates c bindings for many languages.

> Note that this does not rule out
> the
> possibility of writing essential stuff in C#, if it's possible to
> call that
> (preferably without advanced knowledge of the inside of pnet) using C
> functions.

We should be able to call C# functions from many different languages

> * All DotGNU webservices must be able to understand eachother.
>   This boils down to using one API that works with multiple protocols
> SOAP). It also means sending serialized objects is forbidden (unless
> webservices
> written in any language can completely understand the objects).

That means that phpgroupware must talk to dgee. That php and c# can
interop? Only via xmlrpc?

Or the apis for serialization must be made available.


James Michael DuPont

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

reply via email to

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