Donn Cave wrote:
> Quoth Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> | Ben Finney wrote:
> ...
> | > If a programmer decides on behalf of the user that "localhost" should
> | > be treated specially, that programmer is making an error.
> |
> | Inter-process TCP/IP communication between two processes on the
> | > If a programmer decides on behalf of the user that "localhost" should
> | > be treated specially, that programmer is making an error.
> |
> | Inter-process TCP/IP communication between two processes on the same
> | host invariably uses the loopback interface (network 127.0.0.0).
> | According
Quoth Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| Ben Finney wrote:
...
| > If a programmer decides on behalf of the user that "localhost" should
| > be treated specially, that programmer is making an error.
|
| Inter-process TCP/IP communication between two processes on the same
| host invariably uses th
"exhuma.twn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
8< -- sockets,webservices,CORBA,shared memory ---
> Supposing both processes
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"exhuma.twn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
Hi exhuma,
That would depend on what data I was exchanging bet
On Feb 16, 5:11 am, "exhuma.twn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
>
Spring Python makes it easy to get processes talking to each other.
You can
exhuma.twn wrote:
> * Sockets
>Advantage: Supported per se in nearly every programming
>language without even the need to install additional packages
>Disadvantage: Lot's of code to write,
Who's Lot? :)
No, seriously. Why would you think that it's much to write? It can,
especially us
> About "Linda": Am I right that it looks very similar to "JavaSpaces"?
> If yes, are there any funcdamental differences between those two?
Yes, they are both linda implementations, but I have no idea what so
ever how they compare. A local java expert maybe?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/list
Ben Finney wrote:
> "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> (And I would expect that making a connection to "localhost" actually
>> does *not* go down up to the network card hardware layer, but I
>> don't know for real if this is the case or not).
>
> It damned well better. That's th
On 16 Feb, 14:53, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
[XMPP, XML messaging]
> Didn't know that. Yet I presume it is pretty awful to manually decompose and
> compose the method invocations and parameter sets.
It depends on how well you like working with XML, I suppose.
> I've got no
Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 16 Feb, 14:16, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> You can't leave WSDL out of SOAP
>
> Yes you can, since they're two different things. What you probably
> meant was that you can't leave WSDL out of "big architecture", W3C
> standards-intensive Web service
On 16 Feb, 14:16, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You can't leave WSDL out of SOAP
Yes you can, since they're two different things. What you probably
meant was that you can't leave WSDL out of "big architecture", W3C
standards-intensive Web services. Of course, RPC-style SOAP wit
> Maybe this line of mine was a bit too condensed ;) I fully agree with
> you on what you say about CORBA. It's just that for most people IDL
> looks a bit out of place. Especially because it resembles C. But once
> you actually wrote a few projects using CORBA, you actually begin to
> see it's ele
On Feb 16, 1:33 pm, Duncan Grisby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> exhuma.twn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> >what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> >processes.
>
> [...]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
exhuma.twn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
>what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
>processes.
[...]
>* Webservices
> Advantage: Relatively easy to use, can work across diffe
"Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (And I would expect that making a connection to "localhost" actually
> does *not* go down up to the network card hardware layer, but I
> don't know for real if this is the case or not).
It damned well better. That's the entire point of the loopbac
"exhuma.twn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
>
> Let me list the ones I know of:
>
> * Sockets
>Advantage: Supported per se in nearly every programmi
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
>
> Let me list the ones I know of:
>
> * Sockets
>Advantage: Supported per se in nearly every programming language
> without even the need to ins
En Fri, 16 Feb 2007 07:11:36 -0300, exhuma.twn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
> what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
> processes.
>
> Let me list the ones I know of:
>
> * Sockets
>Advan
Hi all,
Supposing you have two separate processes running on the same box,
what approach would you suggest to communicate between those two
processes.
Let me list the ones I know of:
* Sockets
Advantage: Supported per se in nearly every programming language
without even the need to install ad
20 matches
Mail list logo
