[Pipet Devel] BL PL design documentation

[Jean-Marc Valin]

> Well, I would like to think that "all the BL's are born equal". To me, the BL on
> the local machine shouldn't have more to do than any other BL. If you don't like
> the name grandma-BL, we could call it "DL2BL interface". It would be a library
> used by the DL. I'd like the scheduling to be done "in DL space". That's what I
> meant by grandma-BL: one (small) part of the BL code that would be unique for a
> piper program (while you have many parent-BL, one per machine). In my mind, we
> would not even need a (parent-)BL on the local machine if we don't want to do
> any processing there.

I would like to add that if we put the schetuling/splitting of the XML networks
in the DL, we also save some complexity in the BL: it will not have to know what
the XML means at all (hence, no need to link to libflowui and libxml). I like to
think of the BL as a middle pary that handles all the communications (and
authentication), yet without having to understand anything about the content of
the said communications. This applies for the XML networks, the PL-DL
communications, ... I think this might address Brad's concern that the BL would
grow as to include everything including the kitchen sink.

	Jean-Marc

-- 
Jean-Marc Valin
Universite de Sherbrooke - Genie Electrique
valj01 at gel.usherb.ca