Josiah, thanks , I like the classification of in-process / out-process and synchronous / asynchronous
One thing that occurs to me is that "in-process" must imply "in the same language" or at least on the same virtual machine? Or can Python call elisp within a wrapped Emacs in this way? I suppose one things that attracted me to the out-process XML-RPC approach was that I could understand exactly how it worked. I get the idea of a server listening on a port. Whereas some of the other wrapping / message passing technologies I can't quite intuitively imagine how they work; and I worry that they may be more hostage to the specifics of the operating system. Can these wrappers work unchanged on Windows, Linux and Mac for example? phil On Jan 3, 2008 6:00 PM, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really it's a question of in-process, out-of-process, synchronous, or > asynchronous. Using Enso, it seems like the idea is to build > everything out-of-process synchronous (xml-rpc is typically > implemented as a call/return semantic, not a fire/forget/callback > semantic). I'm personally a fan if in-process/synchronous for the > vast majority of operations. It keeps things predictable. Allowing > out-of-process does allow for alternate implementations of parsers, > plugins, etc., but it's not something that I personally would want. > Having async calls can be convenient (I use them myself), but > typically usage is rare, so it may not be a big deal. > > - Josiah >
