On 3/18/08, Eric Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Marten Svanfeldt (dev) wrote:
> > My main view is still that networking does not belong in CS,
> > independent of which library you wrap.
>
>
> Additionally, to justify inclusion of such a module in CS or CEL, there
> must be some sort of added value, such as abstraction (allowing one of
> several possible implementations) or simplified or enhanced
> functionality over what is already offered by the the foreign library.
> In other words, a CS/CEL module should be more than a thin wrapper
> around a foreign library and should do more than merely mirroring its API.
Very true. While I haven neglected the outline, in essence what the CEL
portion would do (as he have it planned) is not just be a wrapper, but it
would allow for secured client/server communication (including all the logic
to handle handshaking, key distribution, antispoofing, etc), a nice network
persistence model, and pretty much just about all the tools you'd need to
craft networking to fit your needs. You'd always have the option of working
at the lowerlevel wrapper plugin, but the goal would be to, as you said,
provide extra functionality.
I do know that there's signifigant feeling that networking doesn't belong in
CS. Perhaps it would be better to simply make it CEL only. I'd have to have
a really nice CEL addition that relies on something in CSEXTRA.
--Chris
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Christopher S. Case
President, Founder
G33X Nexus Entertainment
http://www.g33xnexus.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Crystal-main mailing list
Crystal-main@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/crystal-main
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
