🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8810191748.AA01195@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
)>	I hope I'm not from Mars on this one, but I fail to see why everyone
)>is keen on making IPC connections through a Window's IDCMP port.
)
)	I see it, it's a cool idea because then the IPC is immediately 
)window-oriented.... more intuitive to the user, no?  One could then construct
)'standard' commands to cut-paste text and IFF, etc... without having to go
)through the bother of the clipboard.

I think you're "reading beyond the lines" in my proposal.  I'm not proposing
that the IDCMP become some standard address for interprocess messaging.
And I in no way endorse people sending actual IDCMP messages to a Window
unless you are Intuition.

)	Actually, I think it would be better to EXTEND the window structure
)in 1.4 and add another port, as well as fix the way IDCMP ports work now 
)so one can share them more easily.
)				-Matt

I don't like the "standard port hanging off of my window."  In Microsoft
Windows, messages are sent to windows, but in our world, it's just a
limitation.  A Window isn't such a great standard application representative,
anyway.

Take Preferences, for example.  Right now, how does a driver or something
hear about NEWPREFS?  As another example, I've got programs running
with Commodities Exchange that pop open a window when a message arrives
at a port.  No point in having that port be located by looking at
some window.

Ports is ports.  You will be able to arrange with a new preferences to
get messages sent to a port of your choosing.  Commodities sends messages
to ports you register with it.  Looking up a port by name in the system
list is another form of registration that has nothing to do with
Windows.

It is easy to manage multiple ports registered with multiple services,
but arguably not as convenient to manage as a single port.
Also, if you wish to handle messages from various services in the
order they arrived, it is a lot more convenient to use a single port.

The proposal I've posted is about doing this general port sharing, especially
since one of the important existing IPC services has this existing data format
and the ugly tendency to delete the port when you tell it you don't want
any more messages.

There should be nothing special about Intuition as an IPC service,
especially the managing and registering of ports.  Some standard example
code or perhaps functions in amiga.lib will perhaps be able to
focus application communication around Ports, rather than Windows.

Making standards for the IPC traffic itself would be the next problem.

	jimm

-- 
	Jim Mackraz, I and I Computing	  
	amiga!jimm	BIX:jmackraz
Opinions are my own.  Comments regarding the Amiga operating system, and
all others, are not to be taken as Commodore official policy.