[Kdenlive-devel] Communication between GUI and Cutter

[Jason Wood]

On Friday 08 Nov 2002 4:14 pm, Rolf Dubitzky wrote:
> On Friday 08 November 2002 04:37 pm, Christian Berger wrote:
> I know nothing of DCOP, beside it is based on ICE and that it sounds like
> KDE dependece. I would not vote for a KDE or Qt dependent solution.

I agree about no KDE/QT dependancy, and as far as I can tell, DCOP is one.It's 
a shame, because it makes the setting up of the interface incredibly easy ;-)

ICE is apparently part of X11R6, but does not require an X server to run. I 
have no idea as to what it actually does, though. Still looking into it.

> I have a little experience with CORBA, (i.e. TAO) on our VxWorks
> realtime-cluster. If ORBit is really easier (and faster) I would maybe give
> it a try.

I am reading up on ORBit at the moment. How complicated is CORBA, though? The 
implementation will be completely hidden within the BaseCutter class, but my 
concern here is to not scare off people who are unable to use that class for 
some reason (for example, Gnome people coding in C).

> I also have some experience with MPI but only from a user's perspective,
> but there is more to it. It's maybe not the right thing.

I've never heard of that one, more reading ahead, I presume :-)

> > How about pipes or fifos they should be enought for that
>
> Pipes via NFS can be nasty but as a first step it is not better or worse
> than the socket we use now, is it?

The main concern that I have with sockets is that by being low-level, we are 
going to be reinventing the wheel to quite a degree, and that anyone else who 
cannot use the BaseCutter class will have to rewrite their own 
implementation. That is why I want to offload most of the work out of 
BaseCutter into some standard library that already exists.

On the other hand, if this simplicity comes at the cost of high latency or 
increased complexity, then it is not going to be a good solution.

Cheers,
Jason

-- 
Jason Wood
Homepage : www.uchian.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk