Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!news.psc.edu!wink.radian.com!gatech!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!blackbush.xlink.net!ins.net!heeg.de!uucp
From: Hans-Martin Mosner <hmm@heeg.de>
Subject: Re: [VW] Image to Image Communication?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <331FDED1.6266@heeg.de>
Sender: uucp@heeg.de
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Georg Heeg Objektorientierte Systeme
References: <5fj813-k9s@svusenet.ubs.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:24:33 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01I [de] (WinNT; I)
Lines: 28

Baer Andreas wrote:
> ...
> I wonder what possibilities are available to have to VisualWork 2.5 images on the
> same Unix machine talk to each other in a flexible way.
> I am aware of the product HP Distributed Smalltalk and another product called
> RemoteObjects. I could use the sockets.st File and build some communication
> mechanism, but I would like to reuse any publicly available classes already
> handling this kind of communication.
> ...

Hi,
is the UBS so desperately out of money that commercial solutions for
the inter-Smalltalk communication problem are not an option? :-)

Both PPD DST (nee HP DST) and RemoteObjects include not just the
basics of getting some information from A to B, but have more
advanced features such as transparent message passing.
I don't know much about DST, but RemoteObjects has transparent
remote debugging and exception handling as well.

I'm all in favor of publicly available classes if they solve the
problem well. If, however, you need a lot of work to get them
doing the right things in your environment, they might actually
be the less economical alternative...

Hans-Martin

(Disclaimer: I work for the company that makes RemoteObjects...)
