tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <cmanola...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Jk2 object model
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:06:38 GMT
Mladen Turk wrote:
>  
> 
> From Costin Manolache
> 
>>Sent: 6. siječanj 2004 8:11
>>To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Jk2 object model
>>
>>jean-frederic clere wrote:
>>
>>>Costin Manolache wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I remember some time ago Mladen (?) was suggesting to use 
>>
>>C++ for jk2 
>>
>>>>instead of the pseudo-OO programming.
>>>
>>>
>>>I am -1 for using C++... And wondering why you want to use C++.
>>
>>I don't actually want to use C++ - I'm just a bit unhappy 
>>with the "reinventing the wheel" object model in jk2, and I 
>>was wondering if any alternatives have been discussed.
>>
> 
> 
> Me too...
> The JK2 IMO is a pretty dead project.
> Henri tried to boost that forcing the APR as a default, we did some work,
> but it is agin stalled.
> 
> IMO for the majority of the people the JK is sufficient enough.
> Using APR in JK would perhaps make it the same as JK2.

There are few big differences in JNI handling - the in-process for jk1 
is even slower than out-of-process, and didn't work with tc4.
There is also a lot of "jmx-like" management and monitoring that I think 
is quite usefull.

But you are right - jk / jk2 is probably good enough, no major itch to 
triger big changes. That's not necesarily bad.



> As I see it, most of the people are looking at JK2 as an enhancement over
> the JK, but in the real life there is not much technological difference.
> We still have a same packet communication between them (that hasn't changed
> conceptually from jserv).


Well, it hasn't changed since RPC :-) You have 2 programs communicating, 
there aren't too many ways to do it. What's important is we figured 
that in-process with JNI is faster using packet communication. SWT 
figured it's faster using ints and byte[] - which is the other solution 
to avoid the really bad performance of jni ( and strings ).

I'm interested if jk2 could "plug" into more applications - there aren't 
that many generic "connectors". KDE has one specialized for konqueror, 
and mozilla has one - both are mostly for applet support, with xconnect 
hardly used ( and I heard pretty slow ). If jk2 would support (XP)COM or
gtk object model - it may be possible to access and control various 
desktop application with some simple web-like requests.


> What I would like to see is something different in approach to the problem
> of integration.
> 
> 
>>So I was wondering if jk2 or 
>>something similar could be used as a connector into apps like 
>>mozilla or evolution ( or any other desktop app ) and allow 
>>access to the services and info inside.
>>
> 
> 
> Something simmilar I woud say :-).

Starting from scratch is allways a bad idea ( IMO ).

Costin


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message