2008/12/4 David Springer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I don't mean to sound patronizing, but unless I have missed some fundamental > premise, didn't you just re-invent DO? Maybe the right way to port this > framework is to make your API a thin wrapper on top of Obj-C messages, and > your set up a wrapper on top of DO setup. Just a thought.
No problem. It's a valid question. When I first designed the framework on Dotnet, I did it partly because I wasn't satisfied with the Remoting framework (which is Dotnet's version of Distributed Objects). In the end I suppose it's mainly a matter of taste, but I much prefer the flexibility you get with message passing framework, rather than a distributed object framework. In my opinion it's more encouraging to use multithreading if it's easy to do ad-hoc messaging between threads and processes without having to specify a new class for each communication. And my messaging framework also includes some other nice features I wouldn't get with DO. / Påhl _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
