3 ms·
Maybe we could invent a standard technology for defining interfaces between software pieces. We could call it Interface Definition Language (IDL for short). And
by mring33621 3y ago
Maybe we could invent a standard technology for defining interfaces between software pieces. We could call it Interface Definition Language (IDL for short). And then we could have something that brokers requests to those objects to facilitate intercommunication. We could call that an ORB! Finally a good idea!
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agooh man, we can then build it into the OS and give it a recognizeable name like Component Object Model!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hoistbypetard 3y agoCould we define a common specification for how those brokers should interact with other objects, and call it CORBA?
- ReleaseCandidat 3y agoYes, why not! But I guess that's too complex, we'd need a simple object access protocol!
- tmtvl 3y agoOMG, why are we talking about ancient uncool technology? Jokes aside, there are so many cool standards for doing stuff it's a shame we seem to reinvent the wheel over and over again.
- binary132 3y agoI have an even simpler idea. We can have some kind of protocol header that specifies the size and shape of the structures and functions that can be called using a binary-level interface. Then we can just provide the implementation as machine code where the header maps each callable function to its respective code block. To "return" values, the callables can just push their results onto a "stack" at a known location and return control to the caller. The bonus is this should be really fast and it doesn't even require any codec or message copying.