Sam,
I have been thinking about that for the past week.
> Yurgh. WSDL is probably the most verbose function
> definition language
> I've ever seen.
Yes it is really scary.
>It's really only practical when
> it's auto-generated.
yes, and MS has a nice one for int VS.NET.
> If you're in the
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, James Michael DuPont wrote:
> On that note, what about SOAP for a different
> transport and WSDL for defining interfaces? the WSDL
> can spec out the ins and out of functions.
Yurgh. WSDL is probably the most verbose function definition language
I've ever seen. It's reall
It's a great idea; so great it's already (sort of) been done: see
Parallel::MPI and Parallel::PVM at your local CPAN.
-Aaron
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think this is one of the best ideas since Inline::C. It would make
> prototyping distributed applications far easier.
Second that.
On that note, what about SOAP for a different
transport and WSDL for defining interfaces? the WSDL
can spec out the ins and out of functions.
mike
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think this is one of the best ideas since
> Inline::C. It would make
> prototyping distributed applica
I think this is one of the best ideas since Inline::C. It would make
prototyping distributed applications far easier. However, I don't know
exactly how this would be integrated into the Inline package. It seems
to me that a separate Perl package/API would make more sense.
Best regards,
-Jason
Just a thought I've brought up once or twice elsewhere. I don't expect this
would work out of the box (hell, I personally wouldn't even know where to
begin trying), but something I'd love to see.
Could the MPICH library (http://www-unix.mcs.anl.gov/mpi/mpich/, others?)
be made useful to Perl usin
