Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!CS.UMD.EDU!don From: don@CS.UMD.EDU (Don Hopkins) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: extension philosophy [was Re: audio servers] Message-ID: <9003202318.AA11323@brillig.UMD.EDU> Date: 20 Mar 90 23:18:56 GMT References: <1990Mar18.191329.10787@alphalpha.com> Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background) Organization: The Internet Lines: 41 Date: 18 Mar 90 19:13:29 GMT From: snorkelwacker!spdcc!tauxersvilli!alphalpha!nazgul@bloom-beacon.mit.edu (Kee Hinckley) In article <780@auto-trol.UUCP> marbru@auto-trol.COM (Martin Brunecky) writes: > O.K. The problem I see is that all those really usefull > extensions will make the server HUGE. Example is the XNeWs ... > Another problem is extension loading/adding to the server. > Most users will depend on vendor provided servers, with very > little or no way to bind-in additional extensions, even though > such extensions could be provided by the third party. ... Aren't all of these problems solved by simply having a server that dynamically loads in extensions when they are requested? -kee Date: Thu, 4 Jan 90 14:35:13 -0500 To: NeWS-makers@brillig.umd.edu Subject: Re: bogus arguments, whether pro or con From: rws@expo.lcs.mit.edu (Bob Scheifler) Do I understand that NCR has a meta-extension for loading and unloading server extensions dynamically? It has a mechanism, yes. I don't know the implementation details. Is it in the form of a standard X extension that I could link into, say, an X11/NeWS server? There is no notion of a "standard X extension", in terms of implementation binaries or standardized internal interfaces, at least not right now. Or does it require server modification, and/or operating system support? I would say most interesting X extensions (3D, video, overlays, double-buffering, nonrectangular windows, input devices, shared memory) have required some amount of server modification and/or hardware/OS support.