Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!bcrka451!cadnews From: vansickl@bnr.ca (Greg VanSickle 1561848) Subject: Arexx article in AC Tech Amiga - good but ??? Message-ID: <1991Mar27.135717.8682@bnr.ca> Keywords: ARexx, AC Tech Amiga Sender: vansickl@bcrka340 Organization: bnr Date: Wed, 27 Mar 91 13:57:17 GMT I found the Arexx article (An Introduction to Interprocess Communication with ARexx) in AC'sTech Amiga to be very good. However, after explaining the virtues of multitasking and encouraging readers to write rexx routines that open up message ports, (eventually resulting in the user having a library of useful routines,) the author does a curious thing. He gives two examples of rexx routines talking to each other. In the first, program simple1.rexx runs simple2.rexx and, after a delay, sends messages to it. Simple2.rexx opens a port and receives the messages sent by simple1. The port name is coded in the programs. The second example also codes the port name. Can this not lead to problems? Does this prevent a third program from also starting a simple2.rexx and sending it messages? It also would appear to result in pairs of rexx routines that must be used together, rather than a collection of routines that can be intermixed as needed. IMHO, it would make sense to write simple2.rexx to accept the portname as an arguement. Any other rexx program that wanted to use simple2.rexx could create a unique identifier from, say the date or some process number (any good suggestions?) and pass it to simple2.rexx at it's invokation. This way, any program could use as many runs of simple2.rexx as it needed without concern of what other programs are doing with it, or, conversely, many programs could talk to the same run of simple2. Am I missing something ? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Geg VanSickle Silicon Support Bell Northern Research phone: 613-763-5160 PO Box 3500 ESN: 393-5160 Nepean, Ontario, Canada K2H 8V4 cocos: Greg Van Sickle email: vansickl@bnr.ca --------------------------------------------------------------------- Vancouver van cu' ver n. where we should all be, as opposed to where I am =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=