Re: [DotGNU]Message passing between webservices

[James Michael DuPont]

Peter,
this looks very interesting.
You are talking about creating a new set of attributes (they are not
implemented yet) that will allow for the specification of messages
using c#? 

Does that leave open the ability to use XMLRPC or SOAP or GNURPC as the
transport? 

I would definitly be interested in activly helping with this effort. I
have long thought that C# is an ideal specification language for
interfaces. 

please let me know what there is to do.

mike

--- Peter Minten <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> in the current DotGNU scheme the client UI libs work with message
> passing but
> webservices work with procedure calling. However it makes sense to
> use message
> passing for webservices too. The message passing mechanism I have in
> mind is an
> variant of the FOX system. I don't simply copy the FOX mechanism
> because it's
> optimised for GUI work, webservices require a different approach.
> 
> It works like this: you don't specify variables, constants and
> methods but
> specify members. With message passing every object has only members.
> You can
> send a variety of messages to a member, a simple example is this
> list:
> * GET
> * SET
> * INVOKE
> The handler looks like this: handle(targetname, member, message_type,
> custom_data). It returns a 2 part array,
> the first element is a possible returned value (else NULL), the
> second element
> is the changed data (or if no change NULL).
> 
> Doesn't seem very impressive? I agree fully. The cool part is under
> the hood.
> This could be an implementation of a class using message passing:
> 
> [mp]
> [description="Example class"]
> class Foo
> {
>   [description="DotGNU RULES"]
>   public int A
>   {
>     [description="Get value, returns null if value > 10"]
>     get
>     {
>       return value
>     }
>     [description="Set value, returns exception if value > 10"]
>     set
>     {
>       a = value      
>     }
>   }
> 
>   [description="The next big thing after A"]  
>   public void B()
>   {
>     //Do something
>   }
> 
>   [mp=false]
>   public int C()
>   {
>     //Do something
>   }
> }
> 
> In this example a and b are accessible using messages. A responds to
> get and
> set, B responds to invoke, other messages will be simply ignored. The
> metadata
> is also accessible using messages. I'd set the value of A in an
> object of this 
> class using: handle("FooObject", "A", SET, 5), that's it.
> 
> As you can see using messages isn't time-consuming, you only write
> [mp] on top
> of every class you want to publish and [mp=false] for every method in
> a
> published class you don't want to publish. But the message passing
> system
> clearly wins in terms of object oriented, XMLRPC isnt. Also message
> passing +
> metadata allows the construction of shadow objects.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Peter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://www.dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers


=====
James Michael DuPont
http://introspector.sourceforge.net/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com