Talk:DCE/RPC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Cleanup tag
This article is pretty good but it still needs a little work. The article has a point of view and that should be limited. The prose could also be rewritten to be more formal. Then this article would really start to shine. Triddle 19:09, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Done! Thanx 69.142.2.68 01:56, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
User:lkcl oops, you cut a bit too much, dude :) it doesn't explain what dce/rpc is for, nor does it explain any more why people have avoided it. you also, most crucially, cut the bit about dce/rpc being designed by committee :)
- OK I added "design by committee" back in a slightly more encyclopedic tone, although I'd also appreciate a source for it. What it is you'll have to put in, as to why it was avoided, that I tried to distill to something NPOV and readded. Also, generally you sign your name @ the end ;D (The infamous 4 ~s). Thanx 69.142.2.68 21:03, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Hiya, thanks for considering putting stuff back in. well i was only partly kidding about the design-by-committee, but it's true. Nobody but a well-organised committee would come up with _this_ lot: http://www.opengroup.org/tech/rfc/ User:lkcl 28sep2005
Luke, is "support for AMD64" really "support for LP64 platforms"? Maybe 99 44/100% of the LP64 platforms using FreeDCE are AMD64/x86-64/x64/EM64T/whatever machines, but if it's just making the code 64-bit clean, it also supports Alpha/PPC64/SPARCv9/IA-64/PA-RISC 2.0/etc.. Guy Harris 07:36, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
I removed the editorializing on what people with "extensive experience" want and the evils of reinventing the wheel, it really isn't necessary or relevant here IMHO. I tried to keep the basic point of the original paragraph, which is that the complexity has reasons for being there.
