Re: [TCLUG:12613] Reasons not to use Apache?

["Eric M. Hopper" <hopper@omnifarious.mn.org>]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 04:20:13PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> 
> I see...  I like them because it's so much easier to see what
> they're doing and to test them.  If you know the protocol, you don't
> need no stinkin' dedicated client software, just use telnet!

	Actually, with CDL (Common Data Language) it could build you a
marshaller that would marshal to both ASCII and binary, depending on a
switch.  The meta information would also be stored in a database, so you
could make a program that would parse a binary stream and print it out
in ASCII according to the meta information.

>> 	Also, text based protocols tend not to be designed with
>> asynchronicity in mind.  They tend to make the client wait until the
>> server responds before the client can say something else, and they
>> also tend to have the server do lots of work for one client before
>> paying attention to another.  Will you be talking to lots of clients
>> from a server, or just one or two?
> 
> True, there is that limitation, but I'm only going to have to worry
> about a very small number of clients (rarely more than 1) in this
> case.

	The part of the StreamModule system that wraps up select in a
nice event dispatcher and notification engine is fairly mature.  The
only thing it lacks is a timer.  If you want to do this in C++ and
handle multiple clients from a single server, you may want to check it
out.  :-)

	Let me know how the meeting turned out.  :-)

Have fun (if at all possible),
-- 
Its name is Public Opinion.  It is held in reverence. It settles everything.
Some think it is the voice of God.  Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet
broke a chain or freed a human soul.     ---Mark Twain
-- Eric Hopper (hopper@omnifarious.mn.org  http://omnifarious.mn.org/~hopper) --

PGP signature