Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #11925

Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication

Show all headers | View raw

On 2/10/2012 3:32 PM, Lew wrote:
> On Friday, February 10, 2012 1:50:43 PM UTC-8, BGB wrote:
>> On 2/10/2012 2:15 PM, Lew wrote:
>>> BGB wrote:
>>>> yes, but this thread is also about cross-language message passing, one
>>>> may have to face the issue that, at least one end, will not be using Java.
>>>>
>>>> this means, of course, that both ends will need to be able to deal with
>>>> both sending and receiving the data.
>>>
>>> This is the use case for which XML with schema excels. It is very nearly ideal
>>> for the purpose. XML is semantically void with respect to the problem domain,
>>> schemas provide a reliable contract for interpretation of the messages, they
>>> provide a convenient human-readable format to ensure agreement by all
>>> stakeholders, the drive the easy-to-use tools for XML-based message passing,
>>> and such easy-to-use tools are abundantly available for every major platform
>>> and computer language.
>>>
>>
>> yes, but it is the agreement on particular formats (say, that both
>> parties will use XML and have the contents laid out a particular way),
>> rather than the use of either schemas or validation, which allows for
>> said compatibility.
>
> Sure, and schemas give a simple, readable, clear and unambiguous means to
> communicate the proposal and reach an agreement.
>
> You might as well say that it's the intent of the carpenter that makes the
> furniture, not the saw. This does not make the saw any less useful or valuable.
>

a saw is actually physically needed for the work to be done.


a more accurate example would likely be:
does the carpenter need a CNC milling machine?

the carpenter could just saw at the wood, and make something.
and he could draw up a diagram or make a blueprint or similar if he wanted.

but, demanding that a schema be used is about like asking that he write 
the CNC program, and have the machine do it.


>> it is like claiming that people need to depend on standardized
>> dictionaries (and some sort of automatic word-use and grammar checker)
>> to be able to carry on a conversation, rather than, say, the
>> dictionaries existing as a means of recording agreed-upon word-use patterns.
>
> No, it's nothing like that.
>
> It is like having a dictionary to record the agreement. Following your logic,
> we'd claim that a dictionary isn't useful because all it does is record an
> agreement in a structured, easily-followed and standard manner.
>

I was not saying dictionaries are not useful, only that one can carry on 
a conversation without invoking one at every instant to validate what 
one is saying.

a written specification for a file format will serve a similar purpose.
an XML schema could be considered as a narrower machine-readable subset 
of a file-format specification. although there are cases where it could 
be useful to validate against the schema, this is not likely the case in 
every case.


>> or, like those people who go and claim that "math is reality" rather
>> than "math is a formalized system which can be used to describe
>> reality", and so on.
>
> Huh? To make a math joke, you really are off on a tangent with that one.
>
> What have you got against math people? Oh, and by the way, math is reality.
>

grr, those people annoy me, especially for their whole "the theory is 
too pure to be used for anything actually useful" thing (of believing 
that physical reality is somehow inferior to "mathematical perfection" 
or whatever...).

at least software does something, and has slightly less occurrence of 
people going on endlessly about "perfection" and whatever else (or 
getting all condescending and nit-picky about something being "not 
sufficiently perfect enough", bleh...).


also, my reality happens to be made mostly out of matter, and "stuff".

matter is obvious enough: one can see it, one can eat it, ... 
secondarily: software is "real enough", because one can run it, and one 
can copy it around via drives or over the internet, ...

but, where is the "math": it is seemingly nowhere to be found, and seems 
mostly just to boil down to people messing around with symbolic 
notations and describing the behavior of systems otherwise made out of 
matter.

IMO, it makes about as much sense as those people who believe reality is 
made out of emotions, or perceptions, or morals, or is actually a huge 
pile of laws and words, or whatever else.

(decided against writing a bunch of arguments for how each apparently 
fails as a good basis for observable reality).

rather each is by some means built on top of reality:
emotions and perception being a byproduct of the brain (itself made out 
of matter...);
morals being (probably) a byproduct of large-scale cost/benefit 
tradeoffs (bad behavior -> bad results, and is a place where emotions 
and economics seem to converge, ...);
and laws and words are a byproduct of language use and peoples' attempts 
to organize things.

likewise, math would seem to be a byproduct of the analysis and 
description of physical and mechanical systems.


not that all this stuff doesn't matter, just reality is (probably) not 
made out of it.

also note: it is possible to believe in a reality made out of matter, 
and also believe in religious stuff and similar as well (because, as I 
see it, the belief that they necessarily conflict is probably also flawed).

( could go into the matter of "matter + religion + morals + rational 
self-interest + free market + ...", but, I have probably been going off 
on enough of a tangent already... )


>>> Your comments about different libraries' availability makes an asset sound like
>>> a problem. It's a *good* thing that there are so many libraries available. XML
>>> itself provides the compatibility.
>>>
>>
>> yep.
>>
>>
>> it is likewise for many common file-formats:
>> large numbers of people use them, write code to read and write them, ...
>> so, people go and write down how the file format works, such that others
>> can write things which can read and write the files.
>>
>> luckily for everyone, most people can agree to use PNG and JPEG and so
>> on as well...
>
> But by your logic, PNG and JPEG are not useful because all we have to do is
> invent our own format and agree to use it and re-invent all the nifty (and
> often free) useful tools that only work on standard formats like PNG and JPEG,
> thus throwing away all the human-centuries of engineering and wisdom that went
> into those standards simply because we believe we're more clever than anyone
> else and can exist in a vacuum and don't need all those steenkeen' free, useful
> tools.
>

this is missing the point. to write ones' own code is not the same as to 
forsake using an existing standardized file format.


I do use a lot of standardized formats, just I often feel little need to 
use others' implementations of those formats.

for example, I have my own implementations of PNG, JPEG, Deflate, ... 
granted, I didn't really "need" to do so, but often to use a library 
means either creating an annoying external dependency issue, or needing 
to drag around the library, when often one can get by just writing a 
much smaller and more narrowly focused piece of code to deal with it.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2012-02-07 12:11 -0600
  Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-07 16:38 -0700
    Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-07 20:26 -0400
      Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 01:41 -0700
        Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-08 07:19 -0400
          Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 12:07 -0700
            Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-08 21:16 -0500
              Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 19:50 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-09 06:24 -0400
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 09:15 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-09 18:58 -0400
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 16:15 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:50 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 21:40 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:47 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 12:06 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 15:18 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 23:03 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:27 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 13:33 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 15:50 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 14:34 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:48 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 21:46 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 08:51 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 10:43 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 13:15 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 14:50 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 14:32 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 17:10 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-10 22:08 -0400
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 00:49 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-02-11 14:04 -0400
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:55 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:52 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 20:06 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 22:41 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 00:46 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:29 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:31 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-12 16:02 +0000
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 11:16 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-12 22:46 +0000
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 11:33 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 20:18 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 01:36 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-02-12 13:52 -0600
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 14:43 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:49 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:46 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:45 -0500
        Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-08 14:02 -0800
          Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 18:49 -0700
            Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-08 21:14 -0500
              Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-08 20:07 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 23:29 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-09 09:40 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 17:02 -0700
              Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 21:10 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-09 18:54 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-10 10:25 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 14:45 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-02-11 12:14 -0800
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-11 15:20 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-11 22:20 -0700
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-12 09:23 -0500
                Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-12 12:13 -0700
    Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-02-07 20:24 -0500
    Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2012-02-08 01:31 +0000
      Re: Interplatform (interprocess, interlanguage) communication BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-08 00:55 -0700

csiph-web