On Sun, Aug 10, 2003 at 12:39:48AM +0200, Melvin Hadasht wrote:
Hi,
I just made a patch to add remote control for Dillo.
Terrific! Here are some comments for discussion. Take them with a grain of salt: - I'd prefer case sensitivity (the unixy environment is case sensitive, URIs are -- at least in part :-/ You know, principle of least surprise and that. - Implementation. Why not implement this as a wrapper which talks to the dpid? It would start Dillo if not already running. The advantages I see are: - the wrapper could clean up any mess Dillo might leave behind on a crash. This is one of the open issues you mention. (OK, Dillo doesn't crash, does it? but a simple wrapper is less complex and thus less likely to crash). - You could re-use the existing communication mechanism for dpi1, I think (I haven't looked deeply into this yet, though). The main disadvantage would be, of course, that you have to start dillo-wrapper instead of dillo, but may be we can convince folks in the list that this ie a Good Thing anyway (it would solve elegantly the `single dpid instance' issue, since it could look whether dpid is running before starting dillo). What do people think? Regards -- tomas