Re: State of the BEEP

William J. Mills wrote:
> I think the current implementation is far to grandiose in the way
> that we designed how the components work together.  We were trying 
> to do too much and make its the whiz bang fully extensible plug
> in whatever you wnat thing.

I'm hoping that perhaps the core portion of it, doing the parsing and 
channel handling and such is still usable, especially when the apparent 
"excess fragmentation bug" gets fixed. Hopefully that would be a good 
starting point for someone trying to redo a wrapper.

I've been considering doing an implementation in C#, but I just haven't 
had any time to devote to it. Of course, the performance would be 
somewhat lower, but you'd have the advantages of having a mechanism for 
handling threading, asynchronous dispatch, dynamically loaded modules, 
OO interfaces, built-in cryptography support, and so on. It would 
probably be a whole lot easier. Unfortunately, right now I'm spending my 
copious (<ahem>) free time on another project, but if someone was 
actually interested, I'd be glad to try to help.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA USA (PST)
   I am in geocentric orbit, supported by
   a quantum photon exchange drive....




-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn