[Libreoffice] minutes of tech. steering call ...
hunteke at earlham.edu
Fri Oct 21 02:08:07 PDT 2011
At 4:11am -0400 Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 10/21/2011 02:06 AM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
>> 5. That API definition will be a *lot* of work, but hopefully somewhat
>> thought out already through only a mild reengineering of the current
>> binary API.
> The UNO API is already there. Or what do you mean?
I was talking about an API that is not dependent on an ABI. But I
freely admit I know very little about ABIs, so I may have just conflated
that term. See below.
>> The upside is that if we're talking a major version change, /now/ would
>> be the time to do this.
> A downside is that you would still need to maintain (and build!) the UNO
> runtime for the MSVC ABI.
This may be the crux of what I'm not getting, but why? Why can't a
protocol be, say, text-based via (local, or other) socket? In my mind,
I see two independent programs, from two different compilers, using the
OS and something akin to pipes to communicate. I admit it might a
smidgen slower to do it that way, but do people actually use LO in HPC
scenarios? (And I fully accept that they might, I just haven't seen it
yet in my various interactions.)
More information about the LibreOffice