Re: Fwd: Re: [Plex86-devel] Release Schedule

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 02:35:32PM -0400, Eric Laberge wrote:
> When I said I was looking to a COM-like design, I was mainly referring 
> to the idea of having instanciable components and standard and 
> compatible interfaces. My prototype implementation is very clean and 
> completely usable. And it is 100% standard C. You can see it in any way, 
> but any plugin structure can only be done with these elements. I only 
> suggest we define a standard, non-bloated and portable structure. The 
> current one is filled with legacy stuff, and undocumented, and [insert 
> evil attribute here].

Yes, that's fine for me. You wrote down the reasons why I want to
start from scratch.

> You mentionned guile, can you elaborate on how it can be used?

Do you know guile or scheme? With guile it's possible to write fast
and flexible programs by writing those in C or any other 'fast'
language and use scheme for extension and configuration things. This
way you implement the speed critical parts (which is the biggest part
in this case) in a fast language. The extensions and other parts 
which don't have to be fast can be implemented using scheme which is a
great language.
 
> By referring to GUSS, do you mean sharing emulated devices? From what I 
> see, it seems like a generic Bochs.

Bochs the GNU way, that's it using the GCS and a good design
(i.e. OO). I actually wanted to make the engine modular, so that you
can choose which "engine" to use: an emulator, a virtualizer or a simulator.
 
> BTW, I completely agree we should rewrite at least the Bochs plugin from 
> scratch.

We didn't really like the other parts of bochs/plex86. :)

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber ID: address@hidden  IRC ID: address@hidden
GNU supporter - http://www.gnu.org