Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model | From | Valdis.Kletnieks@vt ... | Date | Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:30:32 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 21:45:14 PDT, asdfd esadd said:
> * a unified well architected core component model > which is extensible
OK.. now for the terminally dense readers of the list like myself, could you repeat that in terms that people who have more experience in slinging C code than buzzwords will understand and rally behind?
Most of the time when I hear "component", somebody's trying to invent yet another message-passing paradigm. And although there's certainly a place where things like CORBA and the dbus stuff solve problems, you have to remember that this is a Linux kernel, not Mach....
Alternatively, explain to me what this component model will do for us that updating the docs on the kernel API won't? [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |