On Mon, 15 Nov 1999 12:11:49 MET, Andre' Poenitz wrote:
>Depends. It makes the executable slimmer if only one frontend is linked
>in at a time and it does not create dependencies on libraries you do not
>need/want/have. Personally I am in favour of having a 'kernel library'
>that contains all real functionality, and seperate UI objects that
>are only linked against this kernel lib.
I think, this is very near to what SMiyata once proposed and to some of
my old ideas: If you link it as some kind of shared object/dll, you
will have multiple buffers in separate, crash protected
processes/windows/terminals, while the additional overhead is very
limited. Overall complexity is reduced. Only common cut and paste
support and common update of the viewed data (periodic checks for any
changes?) has to be implemented then.
This adheres to the old UNIX tradition, to keep things simple and use
separate small tools, combining them in a more clever and safer way, as
any bloated "Link all features into one large process" approach can do.
This provides better stability compared to multiple buffers in one
process (WinWord is a sad example of how not to do design the
approach).
Greets,
Arnd
