-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> OK, that's a good example.  Weak typing would be necessary if you
> wanted to call remote functions with arguments that represented
> message field values, rather than having those functions take their
> values from the text fields.  That might be useful, I suppose, if
> you are calling remote library functions that weren't written with
> Freenet in mind.  But the _caller_ of those functions already has
> to find the fields by name, possibly dealing with subclasses, and
> has to know what the intended use of the remote function is, so its
> benefit from weak typing is minimal since it already knows details
> based on name.  I suppose the benefit is not non-existant, though.

No, imagine a small Freenet based on RPC.  A gateway between Freenet
Proper and this network would want to be able to construct calls to
generic methods in the RPC network, like:

dataReply(Dictionary options, int htl, String url)

It wouldn't want to know the whole protocol.  It would just want to
construct a dictionary, apply the types as necessary with the field names
as keys, and call the method .


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD4DBQE5IEg6pXyM95IyRhURAmWcAJdD5zIe0SiMqALSXVpyBz3+LqLfAKCEyvXq
NQbZoBKQEjeJMby/MU9oVQ==
=8mvf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev

Reply via email to