Re: Capability IDL

[Neal H. Walfield]

At Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:36:07 -0400,
Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> 
> Marcus and Neal and I have been talking, which prompts me to ask a
> question about Hurd IDL -- or more precisely, it prompts me to want to
> learn how what the Hurd group has done may be different from what EROS
> and Coyotos have done.

My opinion has been that we should ignore the issue until we are ready
to thoroughly deal with it.  This is based on a number of observations
from the Hurd on Mach including: 1) there are a small number of
interfaces; 2) interfaces, once decided upon, rarely change; and 3)
writing stub code is quick and relatively easy.  Moreover, with an API
like L4 X.2, the stub code is even portable across architectures.

Thanks,
Neal