Scribit Michal Suchanek dies 27/04/2006 hora 15:24: > > Why should it be a nothing or all case? First, I'm not so sure it > > would break encapsulation that much to be able to kill the plugin > > from outside. Or it breaks it, but it is desirable anyway. > How do you do that? If the plugin is started by the browser the > storage and cpu time is supplied by it. No other process needs to know > that the plugin was started. If you do not know it is running you > cannot killl it.
Yeah, but as I said, in some systems that encapsulation is obviously broken. POSIX seems a fine example, where processes are globally registered. When I ask a tree view of the processes, I can view what processes have be spawn by my browser. And slay them without mercy. > The plugin is started and exclusively used by the browser so there is > no problem with providing an option to kill it from the browser. > Except it might make the browser user interface more complex. It would make the interface more complex, but the life of the user easier. Only the average computer-savvy knows how to kill a process from outside the application that spawned it, either in the shell or with some WM dialog. A menu that would have 'kill the X plugin', and/or maybe a watchdog that barks at the user when something goes wrong, would definitely help the user keeping its environment in a safe and working state with autonomy. Ergonomically, Nowhere man -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
