[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [gomd-devel] A question...

From: Matthias Rechenburg
Subject: Re: [gomd-devel] A question...
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:36:17 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.4.3

Hey my friends,

On Montag 31 März 2003 01:55, Mirko Caserta wrote:
> Ciao Gian Paolo,
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:44:50 +0200
> "Gian Paolo Ghilardi" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Shall we continue with dynamic class loading mechanism or create a
> > standard C-based library (without classes)?
> Not to hassle you but, didn't we talk a long time ago about using shared
> libraries in order to be as easy to use as possible from the monitoring app
> developer point of view?

yep, we should continue with the nice OOP based design using classes.
I really like the dyn-loader JP created so far. It will be easy to use for the 
developers later :)

> I think C/C++ coders should choose the dinamic library approach since it's
> going to be somewhat easier to use than having to #include headers and
> stuff like that. Also, as long as we don't change the shared library
> interface, developers don't have to care about recompiling their stuff
> against the new version of the library (I guess so, but I'm probably
> wrong).


> In PHP, which is what Ramon is going to use, there's support for dlopen()
> and such.
> About Java, I think we need to create a jar package with a "native" Java
> library with simple APIs which interface directly to our library using JNI
> (Java Native Interface). I'd be glad to work on this.


> Java programmers should then only put into their classpath our libgomd.jar
> and start using the APIs provided in the archive/library jar file.
> Ciao, Mirko.

distini saluti,

E-mail  :  address@hidden
www     : http://www.openmosixview.com
an openMosix-cluster management GUI

If you can dream it, you can do it! 

reply via email to

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