Sorry, that's about all I know about pipes :-) Merak
> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Tomiczek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 23 April 2002 12:31 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Named Pipes for Remoting - thanks you > (and a questio n about named pipes).... > > > In theory - yes. Actually I could. Access is from the same > process anyway :-) > > What would be the managed representation of the handle? > > > Regards > > Thomas Tomiczek > THONA Consulting Ltd. > (Microsoft MVP C#/.NET) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Dienstag, 23. April 2002 13:28 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Named Pipes for Remoting - thanks you > (and a questio n about named pipes).... > > > Can you use an anonymous pipe instead of a named one? > I believe Win98 supports the creation of anonymous pipes > > Merak You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
