[Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) bstottle at ford.com
Mon Jun 2 02:30:19 CEST 2014

> This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and remote procedure RPC 
> calls, now using QT signals and slots. "<drool>" again for effect.
> One could review the history of microsoft and the fine RPC mechanisms that 
> turned out to be mostly unusable, or maybe just unused.
> Keep the optimism in check folks. We have a lot of devices now in the mix, not just Win32.


I understand this is a proposal and is code you've never seen.  So it is impossible for you to tell, based on my description, if it actually does any of the stuff I say it does.  It could be the "killer app" Charley is looking for, or a total "who cares" as you seem to.

I am going to QtCS to talk about it, and I'm sure I will be addressing concerns like yours.  /me wonders what Thiago's first question will be....

BUT - unless you are going to be at QtCS, I'd appreciate it if you took the time to express what you think Replicant needs to do to be successful, or at least what you think caused other RPC mechanisms to fail....  While I understand the sentiment, it would be helpful to understand what you think Replicant can do to keep falling into the same trap.  Or are you of the opinion that an easy/sound RPC mechanism isn't possible?


More information about the Development mailing list