On 11/20/08, Christoph Lohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Good evening, > > Am Tue, 18 Nov 2008 20:18:10 +0000 schrieb "Anselm R Garbe" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> The advantage is, 9P can be used in an universal way, network >> transparently and without any platform/language boundaries. The only >> tricky part is defining a sane synthetic fs for abstracting the RPCs >> you are looking for. However, there are non-Plan9ish examples in the >> procfs (might not be the best reference though). > > For 9P you need a system support, so you can use local calls, which > are fast. If you intend to run it over network (resp. Unix sockets), > you have the problem of latency and lazy implementations of 9P. 9P > can be implemented asynchronously, but for a simple library/module inter- > face it's too much of a hassle. > > Christoph Lohmann > > The 9p idea made me think that there may be some simple way of doing it in plan9. I wrote a plumber interface. Its probably suboptimal, but it seems to work. plumber will even loads the handler :)
Doing it this seems to suggest a removal of some of the stuff from the interpreter itself, because you only file io. Another way is to use plumber code to write a dedicated ffi server mount it into the file system, but I dont know if it's any better. I guess doing it this way is very close to the system() call approach. sorry about the OT. but thanks a lot. -- http://www.fernski.com
