Re: [buckminster-dev] Re: Buckminster Roadmap

[Dann Martens <dann@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Scott,

I wouldn't worry too much about ECF being left out. I can assure you 
that it will not: I think IPC belongs in ECF, one way or another. Any 
work I'll do on that front, I will offer as a contribution to ECF. I've 
already discussed this with you on the ECF newsgroup, as I am well aware 
of the mission statement behind ECF.

However, there is one thing I hope you would agree on: the core IPC 
library will *not* have ECF abstractions. There should be another layer 
for that. At the lowest layer, there will be the classical Java I/O 
primitives, as we all know from java.io and java.nio. My starting point 
for this layer is the source code available at: 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/clipc (@author Clark N. Hobbie);

I really think there is an opportunity to implement:
	Named Pipes
	Semaphores
	Domain Sockets (Thomas loves these!)
	Shared Memory
	Signals

Interestingly enough, the named pipe equivalent on the win32 platform is 
in actuality almost (or completely) a domain socket.

There will be a pure Java bundle
	org.eclipse.-.ipc
and native fragments for all the supported platforms, e.g.
	org.eclipse.-.ipc.win32.x86

The example you propose, IPC underneath the remote services API is an
example of this layering, or do you see this differently?

Best regards,
 Dann