[MUD-Dev] Re: DevMUD: Inheritable modules

Jo Dillon emily at thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk
Mon Nov 2 10:13:46 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998


James Wilson (jwilson at rochester.rr.com) spake thusly:
> series of C stubs for their methods, so neither scheme is more general. Perl,
> Python, Java etc all can bind to C++ as well as to C, so there's no difference
> there. But I think we're putting the cart before the horse.

  Do they actually know about C++'s object model - virtual function
tables and so forth - or can they only bind to global functions? I had
the impression that it was generally the latter, at least for Java.
 
> We need to step back a little bit and talk about goals. Are we looking
> for language agnosticism? Anything with C/C++ bindings? Distributed
> processing? I think these questions need to be answered before we can talk
> about intermodule protocols.

  I'd go for C/C++ bindings - practically anything can bind /to/ C
and most languages can export C-callable code. I also want a distributed
mud, but whether the core driver needs to know about that I don't know.

--
	Jo

Harmony - the project to create an LGPL Qt clone
http://harmony.ruhr.de





More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list