dvfs api and toolkits

Jamie McCracken jamiemcc at blueyonder.co.uk
Tue Apr 5 00:18:13 EEST 2005

Sean Middleditch wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 17:09 +0200, nf2 wrote:
>>"C" is interesting for CLI apps and more sophisticated GUI apps or 
>>libraries, which use background threads for data processing (rendering,...).
>>For several reasons - which have already been discussed - i would expect 
>>that D-VFS daemon will use "C" (with threads) internally for the 
>>backends, and should provide "A","B" and "C" through a socket to the 
>>clients ("A" and "C" at least).
> D-VFS will provide A.  You can wrap both B and C around A, so there's no
> good reason to bloat the D-VFS protocol or daemon with special support
> for either B or C.

Given that the backend drivers will either be A or C wouldn't it make 
more sense to support both in the daemon? (it just sounds terribly 
inefficient to convert a "C" driver to an "A" in the daemon and then 
back to "C" in the client toolkit!)

The daemon would therefore need to provide a synchronous wrapper for A 
drivers and a threaded interface to C drivers so that both types can be 
used sync or async as needs be.


More information about the xdg mailing list