A word about serialization (Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc)

2005-11-15 Thread felix winkelmann
Some technical information about the current implementation of serialization may be in order: As long as no procedures or continuations are serializated, it shouldn't be too hard to add more robustness and portability to its format. But once procedures enter the scene things can get so ugly, that

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-13 Thread Thomas Chust
Am 12.11.2005, 14:48 Uhr, schrieb Sean Doran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 12 Nov, 2005, at 13:58, felix winkelmann wrote: I'm not sure how to proceed, though. One approach would be to translate the binary output into a tagged/ marked-up format like *gasp* XML... [...] Hello, CHICKEN already

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-13 Thread Sean Doran
On 13 Nov, 2005, at 17:30, Zbigniew wrote: I think you're describing a more complicated version of WRITE and READ. Well, yes, because that is fundamentally what s11n.egg's serialize and deserialize are... I was trying to be neutral in my wording, since I have no real love of any partic

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-13 Thread Zbigniew
I think you're describing a more complicated version of WRITE and READ. On 11/12/05, Sean Doran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One approach would be to translate the binary output into a tagged/ > marked-up format like *gasp* XML... > > A sender would do something like write a tagged/marked-up (numb

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-13 Thread Sean Doran
On 12 Nov, 2005, at 13:58, felix winkelmann wrote: I'm not sure how to proceed, though. One approach would be to translate the binary output into a tagged/ marked-up format like *gasp* XML... A sender would do something like write a tagged/marked-up (number- >string n). What a receiver d

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-12 Thread felix winkelmann
On 11/12/05, Thomas Chust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am 11.11.2005, 22:30 Uhr, schrieb Zbigniew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I think, this is a fine idea! Serialization is definitely more useful if > it works across architecture boundaries. > > > But 32<->64 communication is > > problematic because y

Re: [Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-11 Thread Thomas Chust
Am 11.11.2005, 22:30 Uhr, schrieb Zbigniew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I was testing out the RPC egg and noticed it didn't work between a Mac and a PC. This stems from endian issues in the s11n egg. Now, I don't know if serialization was ever intended to work across architectures, but I went ahead an

[Chicken-users] s11n + rpc

2005-11-11 Thread Zbigniew
I was testing out the RPC egg and noticed it didn't work between a Mac and a PC. This stems from endian issues in the s11n egg. Now, I don't know if serialization was ever intended to work across architectures, but I went ahead and made a simple patch [attached] to the s11n egg. With this, the R