Re: reiser4 plugins

Lincoln Dale
2005-06-24T08:47:27Z

Hans Reiser wrote:

>>>ow, if his target is reduced to whether we can eliminate a function
>>>indirection, and whether we can review the code together and see if it
>>>is easy to extend plugins and pluginids to other filesystems by finding
>>>places to make it more generic and accepting of per filesystem plugins,
>>>especially if it is not tied to going into 2.6.13, well, that is the
>>>conversation I would have liked to have had.
>>>
>>fantastic - some common ground.
>>any reason WHY there has to be an abstraction of 'pluginid' when in
>>theory VFS operations can already provide the necessary abstraction on
>>a per-object basis?
>>
>>
>VFS supplies instances, plugins are classes. If a language can
>instantiate an object, that does not eliminate the value of being able
>to create classes.
>
>Does it make sense to you now?
>
>
you've lost me . . .

regardless, it isn't /me/ that you need to convince. how about a
posting to l-k on "why Reiser4 cannot use VFS infrastructure for
[crypto,compression,blahblah] plugins" - ideally, for each plugin.

cheers,

lincoln.