From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x231.google.com (mail-wm0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::231]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55AD877D0D for ; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 07:10:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x231.google.com with SMTP id l126so221851722wml.1 for ; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 07:10:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=nKMiFHRIyP3V2+sRB7j2p7Q7ZeD3Z+krJe3v2vbypvo=; b=i7Gy/qBs7COQ10lQQ0PbZQ8r0imVa3UmZevSN61E5eUNXNhPEuXTqlNmJ/iy3IuAyH Pjbo90wYiNgKfIxwIhWsHXNbrCv2UCIw1YtHjBt/kyL/+P08PnwXLqlArUkT61bjUry4 KAqLb0H8lr7Y4tbRV+RBzHYy/PKRnCwiTTMzb5AZT9HTK6VZTFfxCfkJ1dJnnNRKO0bf I36o4dW9jB38kRhFOqLq5C/D+8gUGuZ7/R9nnXoKhrWzV2Mv7ctRMmwkV8XJa/wjIhuk RkY4+tGWFoOtsSzO74ZzQfNyS/h7MZ8pMbPF8DOl+JN0vC1ti9CeNNYvDm0NHFksPwrf 9xdg== X-Received: by 10.194.20.164 with SMTP id o4mr50396486wje.105.1451142652465; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 07:10:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from hob.adamthompson.me.uk (40.77.155.90.in-addr.arpa. [90.155.77.40]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z3sm38164528wjx.38.2015.12.26.07.10.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Dec 2015 07:10:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:10:49 +0000 From: Adam Thompson To: Karl Dahlke Cc: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com Message-ID: <20151226151049.GC3144@hob.adamthompson.me.uk> References: <20151123100928.eklhad@comcast.net> <20151226091107.GB3144@hob.adamthompson.me.uk> <20151126083635.eklhad@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151126083635.eklhad@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [Edbrowse-dev] One program Two processes X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:10:36 -0000 --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 08:36:35AM -0500, Karl Dahlke wrote: > > I'm also going to look into IPC mechanisms for Windows >=20 > Geoff says that if you want portable flexible interprocess communication, > (more flexible than pipes), you have to bite the bullet and use sockets. > Processes listen on certain ports, send messages to each other via tcp, > using send() and recv(), which are both unix and windows calls. > It's rather a pain to set up initially but when it is rolling it works fi= ne. > I'm not looking forward to that, > but as I think about itI'm more convinced he's right, > and why should I have to think about it at all; he's the expert. > He knows. Agreed, sockets was where I was thinking of heading with this. I thought Windows had something like unix domain sockets rather than ports though but I don't know. At any rate, I'd go for UDP rather than TCP for local IPC, that way we can easily multiplex sockets rather than having to multiplex TC= P connections. Any thoughts? Cheers, Adam. --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWfq35AAoJELZ22lNQBzHOFWkH/ic3igWtMlpegE/Jk2QProNA yHGNLU/NxEuLhVIWo9ltIQN1Odox+qxBYVJspQR67LvNZmjQfVKRCKHOup/S21iA TNQDgrpFhyIztPe+1VIpziI9c801arQcgj4LiGsHbnRQGkTL4lJSVHpJs1PSiPKT tGp5f4FahAsKIjm3N06JrKgVVAXLsgWvyUbMfaJljP0LTEI4+8fPeBxOjYrEk8Th GJQbitFT4MM3CDxuLQ4lEsOVURXTCBrM4XS6v59IKOW5y2LlrzYra3yoU5FAWnkC XIHLmAAgWzBGdd415FM3Se4IHp2JV++X215Qc72iHW5GZ+TaewFM2RKPQoEhXBk= =fXYS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK--