[Sugar-devel] python hulahop article
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
lkcl at lkcl.net
Mon Jul 27 12:55:54 EDT 2009
On 7/27/09, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 17:28, Luke Kenneth Casson
> Leighton<lkcl at lkcl.net> wrote:
> > On 7/27/09, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> >> XPCOM is self-deprecating. It's excessively costly for both callers and
> >> implementors of its interfaces, both in runtime overhead and in
> >> expressiveness restrictions.
> > i'd say that that's a price paid for the incredible power and
> > flexibility of what it brings, but hey, nobody said it would be easy
> > :) i'm dead impressed that you got XPCOM right, and that it works as
> > expected, by providing seamless inter-language communication - and now
> > am a bit puzzled that it's to be deprecated.
> Isn't that the same that GObject Introspection brings? You code in
> whatever language that produces a .so with some metadata, then you can
> call it from any language with bindings for g-o-i.
ah _ha_ - an assumption is ".so" :) xpcom and DCOM you don't need
the .so, you just "register" the code with the infrastructure, and it
gets called (on demand, by a caller). in c and c++ cases, that's a
.so, but in the dynamic-language cases, it's definitely not the case.
but to be honest i need to look up gobject introspection before
answering, and i'm glad that you've brought it to my attention - i'm
supposed to know about these things :)
More information about the Sugar-devel