Reworking our support for platform specific functions

[Alexandros Frantzis]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:14:46AM +0100, Alan Griffiths wrote:
> On 14/10/14 08:14, Christopher James Halse Rogers wrote:
> >
> > We're talking about extensions here, but again we're talking about
> > throwing void* around. It's entirely possible to add a mechanism for
> > the platform (or other code) to register extra protobuf handlers.
>
> Not only is it possible, it has been done. We're currently talking of
> withdrawing that feature:
> 
>    
> https://code.launchpad.net/~alan-griffiths/mir/privatize-PrivateProtobuf/+merge/237436

I'd rather we didn't go down the direct protobuf path. Protobuf is an
implementation detail which, IMO, would be a mistake to officially
expose outside our RPC layers. We could potentially add an abstraction
around the protobuf functionality we want to expose, but it remains to
be seen if such an effort is worth it.

Thanks,
Alexandros