From kde-core-devel Sun Aug 04 16:04:47 2002 From: Simon Hausmann Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2002 16:04:47 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: KDE Jabber Library X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=102847717130573 On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 08:16:09AM -0700, Neil Stevens wrote: > On Sunday August 04, 2002 03:40, Simon Hausmann wrote: > > > So you'd requre that all applications wanting to send messages or > > > export presences to go through the *app*, rather than making direct > > > connections? That's a terrible waste, and adds a needless dependency. > > > SMTP use doesn't require kmail, why should my app that wants Jabber > > > have to go through Kopete? > > > > Because that's the idea of reusable components. Talking to kopete > > through a DCOP interface -- after asking the trader of an app > > implementing the interface and after using klauncher to launch the > > app and get the app id -- is much better than making every app that > > wants to send a jabber message to link against a jabber library. Of > > this isn't a general solution, but IMHO for simple send-and-forget > > communication like with IM a using dcop seems much easier and > > lightweight to me than using C++ directly. > > On reusability - Libraries have been the core component of Unix reusability > for a lot longer than DCOP has. You may have noticed that KDE uses > libraries extensively, too. DCOP isn't "more reusable" than a library. For the user it is. A library can't be scripted (dcop kopete KIMIface sendMessage icq://12345678 'Hi Bob') > And you say "much better" - why is it much better? Aesthetics? A > preference for KDE tech over plain libraries? And why do you assume that > all uses are just "send and forget?" > > No, DCOP isn't a general solution. Having full access to the library > functionality *is*, especially when it won't limit you to some paltry > "send and forget." A full Jabber implementation will let apps access some > other functionality - like taking advantage of Jabber's presence system, > too. Ok, I apparently misunderstood the thread a bit, mixing up two slightly different things: A generic mechanism for sending IM messages and an implementation of the Jabber protocol. Agreed that a nice C++ interface to Jabber is something useful to have in any way, independent from the first point. Simon