• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Distributed Objects overkill?


  • Subject: Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
  • From: Wade Tregaskis <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 21:27:04 +1100

So if I write a Rendezvous app built around distributed objects, and later decide to port it to Windows, or Unix, or Linux, or some other platform; would my job be incredibly harder than had I used BSD sockets and so forth, or would my task be equally difficult? Would it involve changing both the mac version and writing a windows version, or simply moving to the gnustep implementations of DO and then writing the windows version. I'd just like to keep my options open and know that moving to windows would not require a complete rewrite on both sides.

Well, one true 'limitation' of using Distributed Objects is that it's not much use without Objective-C. So you'll have to write at least parts of your Linux & Windows versions in Objective-C. This may not be an issue for you, but I'm not sure what the level of support is for ObjC on Windows - Linux you'll be using gcc as you do on MacOS X, so you'll have no problems.

It sounds like you're pretty strongly edging towards a cross-platform program. If so, then to be honest I myself would probably look at using TCP directly via my own protocol (probably using NetSocket or a similar class on the Mac side), simply because I don't think many people have played around with Distributed Objects across platforms, and so there could be some hazy & unexplored areas. It's a calculated risk, essentially.

The main fear I have with DO across platforms is the endian issues. You'll still have to deal with these, however, if you use sockets, so really you may actually be better of with DO on that point - the GnuStep implementation may have solved the endian issues already.

The worst case scenario if you do use DO is that you'll have to rewrite your DO-reliant objects so that they send messages via a socket class directly, rather than using DO. For 'normal' uses, that's not actually that hard. But then that'll break backwards compatibility with your existing DO version.

Wade Tregaskis
-- Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

References: 
 >Re: Distributed Objects overkill? (From: Francisco Tolmasky <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
  • Next by Date: RE: Mail hacking?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
  • Next by thread: Re: Distributed Objects overkill?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread