> > Well, I wanted to attach it to the idl I sent out yesterday. Yes, I will work on the IDL this weekend, we'll can have a pretty good one done in a few days. Implementing the idl will take some longer. > > I'm not really very clear right now how GMS and Overflow will > combine and work together (I'll need to dig more into the code to know > this for sure) Overflow will work as it does standalone, and gms will pass on the calls from and to the gui. > As I said, I'd like this combination of GMS and Overflow to wrap into > one idl (the one I sent out). Yes, right. > Along these lines, I'd like to try and dig more into Overflow and > GMS code and start working with it. This will probably help us firm up > the communication between the 'middle scripting engine' and the > 'processing part' and help get the idl straightened out and all. So... > I was going to throw myself out to the wolves and ask if Jarl and > Jean-Marc and Dominic have parts of GMS and Overflow that they'd like > me to work on/with, to help towards our integration goal. These can be > small short term projects or whatever, but I'd like to help in this > regard, and it would help me be more familiar with what is going on > and actually be able to make more non-vague suggestions :-) > So could we work something like this out? Sure, but first let us define that GUI <-> Engine idl. When we got that ready, things will be much more clear I guess. > I think we sort of have a design down, although at least in my > thinking, the XML representation, the makeup of the processing engine, > and the 'middle scripting engine' and 'processing part' idls are the > most important things we need to tackle in terms of internal structure. > Yes, the overflow people agreed to this design too, so let's make The idl and make a list of features that the 3 projects need to implement in order to let the layers work together. bye, jarl