[PD] tcpserver and tcpclient
hans at eds.org
Mon May 15 12:20:59 CEST 2006
On Sun, 14 May 2006, Jamie Bullock wrote:
> On Sat, 13 May 2006 19:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
> Mathieu Bouchard <matju at artengine.ca> wrote:
>> What would be the name of a unix-socket version? [unix] seems too vague.
>> [pipe] is already taken. [namedpipe] and [localsocket] could be fine.
>> However, putting "socket" in the name is contrary to the naming of [tcp]
>> and [udp]. OTOH, I don't care much for making those names three letters
>> long, because they aren't used often enough. (it's not like [t] or [f])
> How about having a socket class, where the subclass is defined by the first argument like this [socket unix], [socket tcp] [socket udp] etc?
> I haven't looked at Martin's code yet, so this may be inappropriate, but I thought it might be worth suggesting..
I think that the ideal way would be to make a vrey low level object, like
[socket], then build [tcp], etc. as a Pd object based on [socket].
Christian Klippel suggested this approach to me for the [hid] stuff and I
think it works very well.
Ideally, we would so as much as possible in Pd space, so that Pd hackers
can debug, improve, etc. There are many really great Pd hackers who are
not C programmers, nor should they have to be. If Pd is a programming
language, it should be written in itself as much as possible.
More information about the Pd-list