IRC.

1 files changed, 48 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn b/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn
index 05eb53b8..d4622d67 100644
--- a/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/rpc_stub_generator.mdwn
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012, 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
 
 [[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
 id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
@@ -97,3 +97,50 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
       scatter-gather to be used with x15
     <braunr> once more, i fell back on omg idl
     <braunr> oh, there is also flick that looks interesting
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-13-16
+
+    <tschwinge> braunr: By the way, regarding your recent IDL considerations
+      (and I too suggest using some kind of RPC generator basone on whichever
+      IDL) -- are you aware that for Viengoos, Neal has written a RPC stub
+      generator entirely in C Preprocessor macros?  No idea whather that's
+      suitable for your case, but may be worth having a look at.
+    <neal> it probably isn't easy to port to Mach
+    <neal> genode has an ipc generator as well
+    <neal> which is written in a real langugage
+    <neal> that might be worth checking out as well
+    <neal> (note: I haven't followed the conversation at all.)
+    <braunr> i was considering using macros only too actually
+    <braunr> (i thought genode had switched to complex c++ templates)
+    <neal> dunno
+    <neal> I'm not up to date
+    <neal> macros are nice, but marshalling complicated data structures is hard
+    <sekon_> why implement it with just macros ??
+    <neal> no lexer, no parser
+    <neal> no special special tools
+    <neal> the first are a burden
+    <neal> the latter is a pain
+    <neal>
+      http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=hurd/viengoos.git;a=blob;f=libviengoos/viengoos/rpc.h;h=721768358a0299637fb79f226aea6a304571da85;hb=refs/heads/viengoos-on-bare-metal
+    <neal> in the same directory, you there are headers that use it
+    <braunr> neal: cf. http://genode.org/documentation/release-notes/11.05
+    <braunr> tschwinge: why do you recommend an IDL ?
+    <neal> braunr: What about it?
+    <braunr> neal: it shows the difference between the earlier ipc/rpc
+      interface, and the new one based only on templates and dynamic
+      marshalling using c++ streams
+    <neal> ok
+    <tschwinge> braunr: In my book, the definition of RPC interfaces is just
+      "data" in the sense that it describes data structures (exchanged
+      messages) and as such should be expressed as data (by means of an IDL),
+      instead of directly codifying it in a specific programming language.
+    <tschwinge> Of course, there may be other reasons for doing the latter
+      anyway, such as performance/optimization reasons.
+    <braunr> tschwinge: well, from my pov, you're justifying the use of an idl
+      from the definition of an rpc
+    <braunr> i'm not sure it makes much sense for me
+    <braunr> in addition, the idl becomes the "specific programming language"
+    <tschwinge> Well, I see it as data that has to be translated into several
+      formats: different programming languages' stub code.
+    <braunr> you could consider c the "common" language :)