From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <74397773b7238fd47d00b9a51fdbfd61@quanstro.net> References: <74397773b7238fd47d00b9a51fdbfd61@quanstro.net> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:38:41 -0700 Message-ID: <3e1162e60904231038t340f96bfnfaa681a7f10e2b02@mail.gmail.com> From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=002215046c6fd9324804683c5945 Subject: Re: [9fans] 9p2010 Topicbox-Message-UUID: f15fb77e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --002215046c6fd9324804683c5945 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:28 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: > > as a starting point, i'd envisaged simply changing the existing > > system calls to do sequences. > > > [...] > > > > Sequence: adt { > > queue: fn(seq: self ref Sequence, m: Tmsg, tag: any); > > wait: fn(seq: self ref Sequence): (any, Tmsg, Rmsg); > > cont: fn(seq: self ref Sequence); > > flush: fn(seq: self ref Sequence); > > } > > this is significantly more complicated than syscalls. > > - erik > Are we doing all of this to defeat the conveniences we get from the statefulness of 9p? Would a stateless 9p-like protocol be better (no walks)? Is a stateless 9p really HTTP? :-) If those are all yeses, are we re-inventing the wheel? Or does 9p or some derivative really have to get used everywhere? :-) I mean if we figure this out, great, but if not, I think we're still ok, just can't use 9p right? :-) --002215046c6fd9324804683c5945 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:28 AM, erik q= uanstrom <qua= nstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> as a starting point, i'd envisaged simply changi= ng the existing
> system calls to do sequences.
>
[...]
>
> Sequence: adt {
> =A0 =A0 =A0 queue: fn(seq: self ref Sequence, m: Tmsg, tag: any);
> =A0 =A0 =A0 wait: fn(seq: self ref Sequence): (any, Tmsg, Rmsg);
> =A0 =A0 =A0 cont: fn(seq: self ref Sequence);
> =A0 =A0 =A0 flush: fn(seq: self ref Sequence);
> }

this is significantly more complicated than syscalls.

- erik

Are we doing all of this = to defeat the conveniences we get from the statefulness of 9p? =A0Would a s= tateless 9p-like protocol be better (no walks)? =A0Is a stateless 9p really= HTTP? =A0:-)

If those are all yeses, are we re-inventing the wheel? = =A0Or does 9p or some derivative really have to get used everywhere? :-)

I mean if we figure this out, great, but if not, I t= hink we're still ok, just can't use 9p right? =A0:-)


=A0

--002215046c6fd9324804683c5945--