Re: [9fans] channels across machines

[Bakul Shah <bakul+plan9@bitblocks.com>]

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:20:11 PDT Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>  wrote:
> > Or is there a better idea?  This certainly seems preferable
> > to RPC or plain byte pipes for communicating structured
> > values.
>
> i have some incomplete ideas that are tangentially related to this --
> more for handling interfaces.
>
> it seems one could write a compiler that translates an interface
> definition (e.g.  IDL) into a server and a client library; 9p(2) and
> ioproc(2) can be readily used in the generated code to do the tricky
> stuff.  the main part then becomes how to translate the calls across.

I did something like this (map a file of ascii struct defns
to C++ classes that included serialization/deserialization)
for the only company both of us have worked in!

These days I am likely to just use s-exprs if the choice is mine.
The joy of sexpr :-)

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:32:30 CDT Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>  wrote:
> getting a pipe end to something somehow is why you really want to
> leverage the namespace as a 9p file system.

Indeed but it is a separable concern (just like authentication).