Re: L4 instead of gnumach?
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 09:38:17PM -0400, Igor Khavkine wrote:
> I agree, if Mach is taken out of the picture there is no reason to stick with
> Mach legacy like cthreads and even MIG. MIG is not a very good IDL language
> it's highly Mach specific (duh Mach Interface Generator) and only supports
> the C backend. A more widely supported ILD language (probably something
> close to OMG IDL) could be used to rectify the situation.
I read a report about optimizations to some IDL-generated code performed by
the SawMill project. They made the stubs a lot faster improving the performance
of cross-process calls quite a lot (something like doubling the performance).
Maybe it'd be a good idea to use that IDL compiler. (CORBA one if I remember