[Pipet Devel] Re: which handles distribution (was: vsh?)

Jarl van Katwijk jarl at casema.net
Fri Mar 17 10:27:42 EST 2000

> I think it's important that Overflow and GMS aren't completely
> dependent on each other (so you could use GMS for "big" programs
> with distributed systems and use Overflow for "small" libraries on a
> local scale). However, I know for my needs that I would like to use
> both "small" and "big" together, and so I'd like to see Overflow and
> GMS interoperate, so that you don't have to choose one core over
> another. Would it be difficult to define a "distributed API" for GMS
> that Overflow could plug into (when distribution over multiple
> computer was necessary)? Then Overflow could define a "small library
> API" that GMS could plug into to run libraries? Does this make any
> sense?

Yes surtainly does. I've proposed this before, but the overflow people
want to keep the processing speed
and dont want any wrapping. I like to see code like overflow intergrated
into gms, but this wont be started
soon because of the mayor priorities like XML and other that need to be


More information about the Pipet-Devel mailing list