Re: .NET
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 04:26:27PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: You are saying that the Clippy wasn't originally and truly annoying? :-) Annoying enough to spawn vigor! http://www.red-bean.com/~joelh/vigor/ -- Michael G. Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kwalitee Is Job One Q. What are seven candles, seven cows, and seven heads of the beast which rises from the sea? A: Metaphors. They are all symbolic. Which means, they are not real things. --Alex Chiu, Immortality Guy
Re: .NET
You can serialize/deserilize object with Storable
$foo = new Bar
store_fd $foo, \*SOCKET;
and on the other end
$foo = retrieve_fd \*SOCKET;
$foo-bar;
It will work if you have Bar module on both ends.
DS Right, but I want it to work if you don't...
Then maybe SOAP::Lite? SOAP allows to serialize/deserialize objects
and make remote call. SOAP::Lite makes it quite transparent.
server part (which has module Bar):
use SOAP::Transport::HTTP;
SOAP::Transport::HTTP::CGI
- dispatch_to(qw(Bar))
- handle;
package Bar;
sub get_bar { new Bar };
sub new { ... };
sub bar { ... };
client part:
use SOAP::Lite +autodispatch =
uri = 'http://www.host.com/Bar',
proxy = 'http://www.host.com/cgi-bin/server.pl';
my $foo = Bar-get_bar;
$foo-bar;
Another solution is module Class::Tom. I've not tried it so check it
yourself: http://search.cpan.org/doc/JDUNCAN/Class-Tom-3.02/Tom.pm.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)|
| GnuPG 1024D/323BDEE6 D7F7 561E 4C1D 8A15 8E80 E4AE BE1A 53EB 323B DEE6 |
| AGAVA Software Company (http://www.agava.com/) |
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: .NET
On 3 May 2001, Ilya Martynov wrote: You can serialize/deserilize object with Storable $foo = new Bar store_fd $foo, \*SOCKET; and on the other end $foo = retrieve_fd \*SOCKET; $foo-bar; It will work if you have Bar module on both ends. DS Right, but I want it to work if you don't... Then maybe SOAP::Lite? SOAP allows to serialize/deserialize objects and make remote call. SOAP::Lite makes it quite transparent. Errm...wasn't (something like) this discussed just recently and deemed a massive security hole? If I download a program, I don't want to have to inspect every line of source to make that it won't download some bizarre Trojaned module (or even an object instantiated from that module, which is worse because it leaves fewer traces by not writing to disk) from some far corner of Script Kiddie Land. Dave
Re: .NET
Dave Storrs said: On 3 May 2001, Ilya Martynov wrote: You can serialize/deserilize object with Storable $foo = new Bar store_fd $foo, \*SOCKET; and on the other end $foo = retrieve_fd \*SOCKET; $foo-bar; It will work if you have Bar module on both ends. DS Right, but I want it to work if you don't... Then maybe SOAP::Lite? SOAP allows to serialize/deserialize objects and make remote call. SOAP::Lite makes it quite transparent. Errm...wasn't (something like) this discussed just recently and deemed a massive security hole? If I download a program, I don't want to have to inspect every line of source to make that it won't download some bizarre Trojaned module (or even an object instantiated from that module, which is worse because it leaves fewer traces by not writing to disk) from some far corner of Script Kiddie Land. Java's Classloaders and SecurityManagers illustrate one solution to this problem. Being able to set a security policy for various sources of code solves much of this problem. ~ j. // The Almighty in His infinite wisdom did not see fit to // create Frenchmen in the image of Englishmen. // -- Winston Churchill, 1942
Re: .NET
David Grove writes: : Larry, et. al.: Is this similarity on purpose? Yes, but only becase .NET is a VM, not because it's from MicroSoft. The basic goal is to have a Perl VM that can sit easily on other VMs, whether .NET's or Java's or our own. Another example of competing by cooperating, which Perl has always done. Larry
Re: .NET
David Grove wrote: am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of Perl 6 and the .NET platform. . . . many things in .NET have been discussed similarly here. That's because .NET attempts to address real-world issues. The goals of .NET are not evil in and of themselves, you know. distributed objects, I don't recall discussion of this wrt perl6, frankly. Or are we thinking on a totally separate line that just has a few similarities? Yes. Do you feel better now? -- John Porter It's so mysterious, the land of tears.
Re: .NET
DS == Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DS I've mumbled about it on and off. I'd like to be able to do: DS$foo = new Bar; DSprint SOCKET serialze($foo); DS and on the other end do: DS$foo = unserialize(SOCKET); DS$foo-bar(); DS I don't know that much has been made of it yet. well, Data::Dumper/eval does this kinda and the new Denter (from the creator of InLine) does it too and probably better. the biggest problem is marking the boundaries of multiple serialized thingies on the pipe and doing the proper i/o and buffering that entails. i have done the same stuff for stem and it is not difficult but not trivial either. i think it would be best to support a decent (un)serializer in a standard module and let another module handle the i/o and buffering stuff. then you can use them in different ways such as saving the serialized data in a DB or a file instead of only sending over a socket. also dealing with sending object thingies over a socket is a perfect thing to do with an event loop. just had to bring that up again. :) uri -- Uri Guttman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.sysarch.com SYStems ARCHitecture and Stem Development -- http://www.stemsystems.com Learn Advanced Object Oriented Perl from Damian Conway - Boston, July 10-11 Class and Registration info: http://www.sysarch.com/perl/OOP_class.html
Re: .NET
Dan Sugalski wrote: I'd like to be able to do: $foo = new Bar; print SOCKET serialze($foo); and on the other end do: $foo = unserialize(SOCKET); $foo-bar(); I personally am a big fan of Obliq semantics. It's something I'd really like to see in perl. -- John Porter It's so mysterious, the land of tears.
Re: .NET
DS At 12:54 PM 5/2/2001 -0400, John Porter wrote: David Grove wrote: distributed objects, I don't recall discussion of this wrt perl6, frankly. DS I've mumbled about it on and off. I'd like to be able to do: DS$foo = new Bar; DSprint SOCKET serialze($foo); DS and on the other end do: DS$foo = unserialize(SOCKET); DS$foo-bar(); You can serialize/deserilize object with Storable $foo = new Bar store_fd $foo, \*SOCKET; and on the other end $foo = retrieve_fd \*SOCKET; $foo-bar; It will work if you have Bar module on both ends. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)| | GnuPG 1024D/323BDEE6 D7F7 561E 4C1D 8A15 8E80 E4AE BE1A 53EB 323B DEE6 | | AGAVA Software Company (http://www.agava.com/) | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: .NET
At 09:30 PM 5/2/2001 +0400, Ilya Martynov wrote: DS At 12:54 PM 5/2/2001 -0400, John Porter wrote: David Grove wrote: distributed objects, I don't recall discussion of this wrt perl6, frankly. DS I've mumbled about it on and off. I'd like to be able to do: DS$foo = new Bar; DSprint SOCKET serialze($foo); DS and on the other end do: DS$foo = unserialize(SOCKET); DS$foo-bar(); You can serialize/deserilize object with Storable $foo = new Bar store_fd $foo, \*SOCKET; and on the other end $foo = retrieve_fd \*SOCKET; $foo-bar; It will work if you have Bar module on both ends. Right, but I want it to work if you don't... Dan --it's like this--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
Re: .NET
am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of Perl 6 and the .NET platform. . . . many things in .NET have been discussed similarly here. That's because .NET attempts to address real-world issues. The goals of .NET are not evil in and of themselves, you know. Depends on whether you believe MS marketing. Once you dig through all the manure, you end up with some pretty basic concepts -- a new COM, the realization that C++ cause problems with mixed languages, and Microsoft's desperation to do something remotely interesting for a change (still waiting for something original for a change).
Re: .NET
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 05:22:26PM -0400, David Grove wrote: am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of Perl 6 and the .NET platform. . . . many things in .NET have been discussed similarly here. That's because .NET attempts to address real-world issues. The goals of .NET are not evil in and of themselves, you know. Depends on whether you believe MS marketing. Once you dig through all the manure, you end up with some pretty basic concepts -- a new COM, the realization that C++ cause problems with mixed languages, and Microsoft's desperation to do something remotely interesting for a change (still waiting for something original for a change). You are saying that the Clippy wasn't originally and truly annoying? :-) Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$320 -- $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
RE: .NET
-Original Message- From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 5:26 PM To: David Grove Cc: Perl 6 Language Mailing List Subject: Re: .NET (still waiting for something original for a change). You are saying that the Clippy wasn't originally and truly annoying? :-) Something worthwhile and interesting? A benefit to mankind? ummm, Something that IBM or the Sun corporation would want to steal?
Re: .NET
Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$320 This is a really good article. The quotes from MS and Sun whitepapers are living proof that rarely are superior technical means being espoused. Superior sales are the more likely culprit, especially when a solution is proposed as new and innovative, when it usually isn't. Another snippet from the .NET whitepaper: snip Everyone believes the Web will evolve, but for that evolution to be truly empowering for developers, businesses, and consumers, a radical new vision is needed. Microsoft's goal is to provide that vision and the technology to make it a reality. /snip In other words, evolution in and of itself is not empowering. Without the vision[tm], evolution is deempowering.
Re: .NET
It's certainly a mistake to say the goals of .NET, as if they were a monolithic whole. But the point is, some of the (technical) goals of .NET are worthy, if not the slightest bit original; and so it should not be a shame if some of Perl6's goals were collinear with them. And I hope that ends this thread. -- John Porter It's so mysterious, the land of tears.
Re: Net::Ping problem
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 02:51:03PM +0200, Willy wrote: Does anyone know how can i [snip] How can i do?? You cannot do this in perl6 because perl6 does not yet exist. Please do not abuse this mailing list with off-topic questions. Thank you. -- Tad McClellan SGML consulting [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perl programming Fort Worth, Texas
