Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!pasteur!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!pete
From: pete@violet.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Browser 2.0 idea.
Message-ID: <7456@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 7 Mar 88 08:15:05 GMT
References: <724@nuchat.UUCP> <325@ardent.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: pete@violet.berkeley.edu.UUCP ( Pete Goodeve )
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 23

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...!)