peter@nuchat.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (03/03/88)
Anybody have any nifty ideas for what I can do with a public message port in Browser? One thing I thought of would be to allow someone to send me a message that said "Hi! I just wrote this file to the disk. Here's the name and lock. Why don't you stick it in your window if you happen to have this directory open.". Or "Hi, I just deleted this file..." Or how about "Hi, I want to be a tool. When you want me to wake up just send the WBStartup message to this port." Or how about "Hi, I want to be a tool. Just give me WBStartup messages to this port when someone drops files in this window." Anyone interested in becoming integrated? -- -- a clone of Peter (have you hugged your wolf today) da Silva `-_-' -- normally ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter U -- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.
rap@ardent.UUCP (Rob Peck) (03/07/88)
In article <724@nuchat.UUCP>, peter@nuchat.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: > Anybody have any nifty ideas for what I can do with a public message port > in Browser? > > Anyone interested in becoming integrated? > -- > -- a clone of Peter (have you hugged your wolf today) da Silva `-_-' If you are going to do the public message port thing anyway, why not go with what COULD become a standard, and make it respond as an AREXX port might respond. AREXX ports receive from AREXX (or anybody else for that matter) a message that looks remarkably like an AmigaDOS packet, with up to 15 parameters, each of which is an APTR, but could be used to pass something else if desired. And there is a result1 and result2 field in the message structure for return of the results. I almost have the last bugs out of adding an AREXX port to SpeechToy (I know more about doing the port than I did before, and am making fewer mistakes). I have not used AREXX extensively, but I can see lots of possibilities in it. When I have the SpeechToy mods done, I will post it, with the AREXX mods easily visible, so show others that it is really not so hard to do. Published standards make it a lot easier to integrate tools. I think AREXX has a good idea. DISCLAIMER: I am just a satisfied customer (and a tool junky). I have no connection with the author of AREXX. Rob Peck ...ihnp4!hplabs!ardent!rap
pete@violet.berkeley.edu (03/07/88)
In article <325@ardent.UUCP> rap@ardent.UUCP (Rob Peck) writes: | In article <724@nuchat.UUCP>, peter@nuchat.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: | > Anybody have any nifty ideas for what I can do with a public message port | > in Browser? | | If you are going to do the public message port thing anyway, why not | go with what COULD become a standard, and make it respond as an AREXX | port might respond. AREXX ports receive from AREXX (or anybody else | for that matter) a message that looks remarkably like an AmigaDOS | packet, with up to 15 parameters, each of which is an APTR, but could | be used to pass something else if desired. And there is a result1 and | result2 field in the message structure for return of the results. Arggghhh! I was scared it would be something like that. I've been asking for months for someone to tell me the AREXX format. Maybe people were just afraid of the reaction... Sorry Rob, but now I like AREXX even less than I thought I might. (See the "IPC..." correspondence for some hopefully more useable conventions.) -- Pete -- (no relation to Peter of the above...!)