Site Sponsors:
PC Signaling & IPC Efficiencies 
Linkedin: Observations on Qt Signalling:

Qt Design Lamentations


I still do not understand what was wrong with simply using structs... Indeed, even when it comes to IPC, savvy consultants have always liked marshalling such things into XDR/RPC packages.... Allot like "Bundles" or "Parsables" on Android, once a standards-based out-of-process marshalling has been ensured, data can pretty much go everywhere. The only benefit to not having so many struct-version compile-time changes is to ensure that any time-frozen stringy-application will break someday?

Data Interopt


When it comes to IPC, savvy consultants have also always liked XDR/RPC. The cornerstone of CORBA, many are gratified that - years after Microsoft upset the apple-cart with their COM/DCOM nightmare - that places like Google's GWT are finally abandoning the fat-and-chatty XML (and even JSON!) world for things like good 'old XDR.

The CORBA/DCOM War


Why did we ever get into this nightmare world of passing strings? Because - at the time - Microsoft did not like things like XDR because the transmission favoured Motorola (natural order / big-endian) format over that strange INTEL (little-endian) format.
(click to enlarge)

Many of my friends at MS felt like they were being picked on. Today however, with AMD / INTEL computing speeds being what they are in multicore, who the heck cares?

Trade-Offs


Looking at messages more as octets than double-byte characters results in transmissions that are ever-so marvellously faster, as well as often laughingly more efficient & secure than these "string things." While understanding protocols from the wire-up is tougher on the commodity-developer, taking the time to learn about things like binary efficiencies is invariably massively easier on the computer. --Many feel that weighing system performance (as well as genuine security!) over developer-ease and industry convention (homogeneity is - by very definition - insecure) is one of many long forgotten absolute necessities of designing larger-scale enterprise systems.

Lean, Mean ... and Green?


Of course, better performance means allot less switches, routers, network traffic, and computers... Such effective weight loss surely spells less rack-space, lower utility costs ... and is therefore allot easier on this spaceship that we call earth, too?

While knowledge is indeed power, perhaps wisdom might yet save our planet? :-)


Indeed, when it comes to why-the-heck use anything other than structs or XDR under QT, I remember wondering why folks ever used such silly & unsafe string-mechanism as that Qt signal tomfoolery. --For decades, marshaling structs between things like CORBA skeletons / signatures have been doing much the same thing, yet providing full-speed end-to-end type safety via delivery systems such as RPC. When it comes to stark type-safety & efficiency, why not use it between process, as well as between computers? While a bit overkill for local signal-signatures, rather than being so string-generic even a humble struct surely might be used?

CORBA Problems


Of course, with the CORBA type safety comes a problem of routing / scaling / and using generic turnstiles such as what we see in Spring Integration. Resolving those problems are what the Internet Inter-ORB Protocol (IIOP) and CORBA Services are all about.

Olde-School Bestfficiencies


Yet, come to discussing Java in a C/C++ forum (bad idea?), it is fun to note that both generic (common message header -w- size fields (etc)) - as well as all competent security (bit-level field encoding, etc.) remains ever in the realm of the absolute efficiency folded into those 1970-someting transactions... -For more secured transactions, even today it seems that only a blast to that transactional-past can be allot more readily 'rollingly obfuscated... as well as a whole lot more efficient?

[ add comment ] ( 1656 views )   |  permalink  |  related link

<<First <Back | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | Next> Last>>