Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!blackbush.xlink.net!ins.net!heeg.de!hmm
From: hmm@heeg.de (Hans-Martin Mosner)
Subject: Re: Transfering objects over networks
Message-ID: <E1s3q4.J7n@heeg.de>
Sender: uucp@heeg.de
Organization: Georg Heeg Objektorientierte Systeme, Dortmund, FRG
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <57s7ge$jv6@due.unit.no>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 1996 09:01:15 GMT
Lines: 29

Runar Jordahl (runarj@ifi.unit.no) wrote:
: SmalltalkAgents has support for transfering objects over a network
: connection. Does any other flavor of Smalltalk include support for this? I
: know many implementations support network connections (like TCP/IP), but
: can I use these connections for EASY transfer of objects. Or do I have to
: (manually) break objects down to a byte-stream?

For VisualWorks, there's HP Distributed Smalltalk (now marketed by
ParcPlace-Digitalk) which is a CORBA implementation.

<commercial>
We sell a product called 'Remote Objects' that is less standards-oriented
but provides very transparent connectivity, including remote
debugging and exception handling. Enquire at info@heeg.de.
</commercial>

By the way, breaking objects into a byte-stream is already supported
in VisualWorks: Look at the BinaryObjectStorage classes. It's
perfectly reasonable to run them on a Socket instead of a File.
As long as you don't have to manage references to objects on the
other side, this might be just what you need.

Hans-Martin

--
+--- Hans-Martin Mosner ---- Senior Smalltalk Guru :-) ---+
| These opinions are entirely ficticious.  Any similarity |
| to real opinions is purely coincidental and unintended. |
+--- <hmm@heeg.de> ------ URL:http://www.heeg.de/~hmm/ ---+
