gw_svc_call (was Re: [DotGNU]Goldwater Documentation)

[Stephen Compall]

Chris Smith wrote:
> First draft of the essential (and now I come to document them - small set) of 
> C API functions for Goldwater are up on the website.
>
> There is also the beginnings of a full training suite taking the reader 
> through basic concepts to creating applications with GW.  Not complete 
> though, but enough there with code examples to help illustrate the API in use.
>
> Spelling mistakes are probably abound!
>
> Chris

On gw_svc_call:

1. you mean explicitly freed, not implicitly. If it was implicitly, the 
user wouldn't have to do anything :)

2. You provide a way to avoid blocking calls with GW_NOREPLY, but this 
method of returning "immediately" provides no reply from the service, 
obviously. I suggest a way to receive a reply asynchronously with a 
callback mechanism. That way, users can avoid the overhead (and clutter) 
of new threads.

3. I don't like the idea of limiting oneself to servers and clients: 
once a connection is established, the server and client should be able 
to make "calls" to each other. Perhaps a GWService might keep a client 
object around, and use this to make those calls. Even better, the 
connected client could be described with a path (local to the service), 
just as the "services" are.

--
Stephen Compall
Also known as S11001001
DotGNU `Contributor' -- http://dotgnu.org

When I cook spaghetti, I do object if someone else eats it, because
then I cannot eat it. His action hurts me exactly as much as it
benefits him; only one of us can eat the spaghetti, so the question
is, which? The smallest distinction between us is enough to tip the
ethical balance.

But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly
and me only indirectly. Whether you give a copy to your friend affects
you and your friend much more than it affects me. I shouldn't have the
power to tell you not to do these things. No one should.
        -- RMS, "Why Software Should Not Have Owners"