Re: better libraries for IPC?
<salsaman <at> xs4all.nl>
2008-09-19 00:35:09 GMT
On Wed, August 6, 2008 23:39, Kentaro Fukuchi wrote:
> As you know, dividing a task into several sub-tasks and distributing them
> several processes is known as good solution. That is the reason why I like
> the approach of Jack and vJack.
> In such case you have to add Inter-Process-Communication functions to your
> software. And of course, it is better to use existing widely-used protocol
> or library as possible than coding your own, no-tested, simple but
> networking routine.
> So there is a question. If you want to use IPC over the network (IP), what
> is the better solution for that?
> Socket programming from scratch? Oh dear, it is 21st century. You have to
> care of the byte-order, size of your integer, error handling, timeout,
> buffer-overflow, etc., etc.
> Opensound control is one of the good protocols because it is widely used
> and easy to code. But it is mainly designed for one-way data passing.
> Query-and-result style of communication does not fit on OSC.
> # Actually you can do two-way IPC via OSC by using special addres "#reply"
> # that is employed by some OSC libraries, but it's still complicated.
> Do you know any better solution for this? I would like to code the IPC
> like this:
> Me: Hey computer, send "give me data" to that process!
> Com: Yes sir - he returned two integers and one string. The first integer
> best regards,
I just noticed this on freshmeat:
maybe of some interest to you as well ?
piksel-dev mailing list
piksel-dev <at> bek.no