Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Architecture Question: RMI/Web Methods for assemblies, libraries ( mono, gtk, et alias )

29 views
Skip to first unread message

jbailo

unread,
Oct 26, 2003, 12:01:39 AM10/26/03
to

I have been working with c#/dotnet and mono and
also the Gtk toolkit ( I have used Qt as well).
I am working on a java project at work too.

My question is: why do we need to have local
assemblies or libraries for link or run?

Can't a single 'framework server' be set up on
the Internet to sent the services of the framework?

Isn't that what RMI and 'web methods' are all about?

So why isn't System.Dll and System.Object a networked
service?

Why isn't Gtk a shared networked library?

Why aren't the java Core classes public and networked?

Why do I have to 'download and install' all these
libraries, which are the same across all these
local hard disks and therefore highly redundant.

Advantage would be that it would always be up to
date, and common across applications. Less installation.
And it would be truly, write once, run anywhere
because you would not need to have java classes,
assemblies or libraries when you build, or run.


--
There are Ogg Vorbis streams @
Virgin Radio
http://www.virginradio.co.uk/thestation/listen/index.html

Linønut

unread,
Oct 26, 2003, 10:53:39 AM10/26/03
to
While restarting Outlook, jbailo grumbled:

> My question is: why do we need to have local
> assemblies or libraries for link or run?
>
> Can't a single 'framework server' be set up on
> the Internet to sent the services of the framework?
>
> Isn't that what RMI and 'web methods' are all about?
>
> So why isn't System.Dll and System.Object a networked
> service?
>
> Why isn't Gtk a shared networked library?
>
> Why aren't the java Core classes public and networked?
>
> Why do I have to 'download and install' all these
> libraries, which are the same across all these
> local hard disks and therefore highly redundant.
>
> Advantage would be that it would always be up to
> date, and common across applications. Less installation.
> And it would be truly, write once, run anywhere
> because you would not need to have java classes,
> assemblies or libraries when you build, or run.

What a security nightmare!

--
Windows desktops and servers can find a safe haven on a
GNU/Linux/FreeBSD network!

0 new messages