Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Tom <Thomas-911@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:02:08 GMT
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 17:36:59 GMT, "Bill Reid"
<hormelfree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Oops. Insight, insight, insight. My phonetic guessing due to my poor
Tom <Thomas-911@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6e5ao2lcbal3ofomguqaro5udd98env0he@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 08:15:46 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tom said:
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 23:33:27 +0000 (UTC),
gazelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kenny McCormack) wrote:
In article <45845237.1596155@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roland Pibinger <rpbg123@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 18:11:49 GMT, Tom wrote:
withThe scenario is: Several networked machines. Each performing stock
analysis on individual or a small group of financial instruments and
then passing buy/sell instructions to an order placing machine.
Is the platform, by any chance, Windows?
If so, try using INI files. Works real well.
Thanks for the tip Kenny.
It's a tip that doesn't do you any good, though, always assuming your
problem isn't that of opening and writing and reading and closing the
files. For that, any old format will work. But the advice is no more than
we'd expect from Mr McCormack.
The proper way to do this is via sockets, but yes, you could hack at it
busyfiles if you wanted, if you wanted something short-term while you were
LOL!!! Thanks for the entertaining spelling!learning sockets.Thanks for your incite Richard.
Of course, all of this sounds like classic job for something like
"remote procedure calls" (RPC) just off the top of my head, so
I typed "remote procedures" into the Google(TM) search
box on my ISP home page and got about 128,000 links in
0.14 seconds.
The top link seems to contain a lot of the "C" code needed
to implement client-server RPC, so check it out and see
if this is what you want:
http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/Dave/C/node33.html
Or if the ACTUAL problem you are trying to solve can BE
solved BEST by using RPC (note carefully the description of
RPC in the first paragraph of the link, particularly the part
about "network transport independence" in light of the
advice here about "sockets"). I'm not completely sure from
your description if that is even the case (except you seem to
require a "lock" to prevent multiple use of the same file), but if it is,
I would think that somewhere in the 128,000 or so links, you'll
have enough to proceed, or at least think about...
Now "RPC" is kind of a generalized concept that sort of came
out of other concepts such as "distributed computing", and that
it was implemented in Unix as "CORBA", and be aware
that Microsoft has their own version of it (naturally) that has gone
through several versions...I've used what they call "DCOM" in the
past, so you might want to look at that on the MSDN site (or cite!)
for stuff like that...
In any event, back the regularly-scheduled flame war!
---
William Ernest Reid
spelling ability sometimes gets me into places I don't intend to go.
That incite got past my old Agent spell checker without a hitch. It's
not misspelled ... it's just the wrong word.
I'd have googled the same if I had been smart enough to know what to
google. There are so many methods and acronyms it makes even knowing
where to start difficult for the novice.
For now I am stuck in MicroSoftville. I realize this is disgusting for
many of the guru's here. But I do not have the resources (knowledge,
time, $$, guts) to make a major switch in my computer system at this
time.
From my side of the tracks it is tough to learn from the moreknowledgable on the other side. I think the top dogs command both
sides. But this is certainly a haven for a majority of others who have
made a choice in the past that is beyond my means for now. Please
don't hate me for my skin tone, driving a Ford, or using MS products.
It's just who and where I am and I am trying to learn how to do things
beyond my current skill level.
The flame wars confuse the novices who seek help. But once you see
past them ... there is some remarkable wit thrown around in here. At
times it is outrageously funny. It makes one grow a thicker skin and I
suppose this is a good thing too. Unfortunately it is also
intimidating at times. So when in here I try my hardest to emphasize
my low skill level.
For now I consider RPC, sockets, file writing hack, and INI techniques
to all be possibilities. I'll try to learn enough about each to make
the best choice. I wonder how many other techniques will surface? In a
networking newsgroup it was suggested I consider XML within the .Net
framework and using SOAP. <- Another new acronym in the puzzle for me
that I have not even googled yet (but I will!) I think the XML is way
out of my league. That person also seems willing to point me towards
some useful socket tutorials. There are useful tutorials and sometimes
those that just add to the confusion. I've got my fingers crossed for
some good ones to come my way.
See!! All you guys encouraged me to seek help in other groups. And I
am! I do try.
It's google time for me.
Safe holidays and Merry Xmas.
-- Tom
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Bill Reid
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Mattan
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- References:
- Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Tom
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Roland Pibinger
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Tom
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Roland Pibinger
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Kenny McCormack
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Tom
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Tom
- Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- From: Bill Reid
- Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- Prev by Date: How does C handle issues arising out of Endianness?
- Next by Date: Re: reverse a single linked list
- Previous by thread: Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- Next by thread: Re: Dynamic C to C Data Transfer
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|