Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Inline::C in a module

Expand Messages
  • bemmu
    I saw Paul has provided us with an example of using Inline::C from a daemon. But what if I would like to use it from a module that is being autodispatched to?
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 18, 2003
      I saw Paul has provided us with an example of using Inline::C from a
      daemon. But what if I would like to use it from a module that is
      being autodispatched to?

      If I make a module like normal, say PrintHello.pm and then inside do
      something along the lines of

      package PrintHello;
      use Inline C => <<'END_C';
      void c_hello() {
      printf("hello!\n");
      }
      sub hello {
      # I might want to do other stuff here with perl before the call.
      c_hello;
      }
      END_C

      I just get a some errors about Inline.pm not being in the @INC as I
      try to call the module by SOAP. I'd like to see an example of making
      an Inline::C module.

      The bigger picture problem I am trying to solve is making a SOAP
      interface to a freetext search engine which has a C API. I use
      Solaris.
    • Robert van Engelen
      Hi, This might help: the gSOAP toolkit supports (pure) C and is portable to Solaris. Good luck. - Robert
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 18, 2003
        Hi,

        This might help: the gSOAP toolkit supports (pure) C and is portable to
        Solaris.

        Good luck.

        - Robert

        On Wednesday, June 18, 2003, at 11:09 AM, bemmu wrote:

        > I saw Paul has provided us with an example of using Inline::C from a
        > daemon. But what if I would like to use it from a module that is
        > being autodispatched to?
        >
        > If I make a module like normal, say PrintHello.pm and then inside do
        > something along the lines of
        >
        > package PrintHello;
        > use Inline C => <<'END_C';
        > void c_hello() {
        > printf("hello!\n");
        > }
        > sub hello {
        > # I might want to do other stuff here with perl before the call.
        > c_hello;
        > }
        > END_C
        >
        > I just get a some errors about Inline.pm not being in the @INC as I
        > try to call the module by SOAP. I'd like to see an example of making
        > an Inline::C module.
        >
        > The bigger picture problem I am trying to solve is making a SOAP
        > interface to a freetext search engine which has a C API. I use
        > Solaris.
        >
        >
        > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > ---------------------~-->
        > Looking for the latest Free IT White Papers?
        > Visit SearchNetworking.com to access over 500 white papers.
        > Get instant access at SearchNetworking.com Today
        > http://us.click.yahoo.com/l8VQRB/OLNGAA/ddnFAA/W6uqlB/TM
        > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
        > ~->
        >
        > -----------------------------------------------------------------
        > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
        > implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • Stanislav Opichal
        Hi All! During writting a documentation for DIME support I found that the http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/dime-doc.wsdl specification contains this
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 25, 2003
          Hi All!

          During writting a documentation for DIME support I found that the
          http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/dime-doc.wsdl specification contains
          this complexType declaration:

          <complexType name="ReferencedBinary">
          <simpleContent>
          <restriction base="xsd:base64Binary">
          <annotation>
          <appinfo>
          <content:mediaType value="application/octetstream"/>
          </appinfo>
          </annotation>
          <attribute ref="ref:location" use="optional"/>
          </restriction>
          </simpleContent>
          </complexType>

          Isn't it wrong according to the XML Schema specification? IMHO there
          should be extension used instead of the restriction.

          best regards

          Stop

          --
          Stanislav Opichal
          WASP C++ Senior Engineer
          Systinet (formerly Idoox)
          http://www.systinet.com
        • Saha, Saikat
          Hi, I have pointed same issue to Simon few weeks back and we had a long thread on this issue. I completely agree with you that this has to be an extension.
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 25, 2003
            Hi,

            I have pointed same issue to Simon few weeks back and we had a long thread
            on this issue. I completely agree with you that this has to be an extension.

            Thanks,
            Saikat

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Stanislav Opichal [mailto:stop@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 5:41 AM
            To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [soapbuilders] Round4 DIME doc/lit WSDL issue


            Hi All!

            During writting a documentation for DIME support I found that the
            http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/dime-doc.wsdl specification contains
            this complexType declaration:

            <complexType name="ReferencedBinary">
            <simpleContent>
            <restriction base="xsd:base64Binary">
            <annotation>
            <appinfo>
            <content:mediaType value="application/octetstream"/>
            </appinfo>
            </annotation>
            <attribute ref="ref:location" use="optional"/>
            </restriction>
            </simpleContent>
            </complexType>

            Isn't it wrong according to the XML Schema specification? IMHO there
            should be extension used instead of the restriction.

            best regards

            Stop

            --
            Stanislav Opichal
            WASP C++ Senior Engineer
            Systinet (formerly Idoox)
            http://www.systinet.com



            -----------------------------------------------------------------
            This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
            implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.

            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Wes Moulder
            Saikat and Stanislav, It s a restriction because you are restricting the entire value space from any base64 encoded binary down to any base 64 encoded binary
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 25, 2003
              Saikat and Stanislav,
              It's a restriction because you are restricting the entire value space
              from any base64 encoded binary down to any base 64 encoded binary with
              the mediaType of application/octetstream.

              Further, this isn't actually an extension because it replaces the
              innards of the element with an attribute pointing to the location of the
              actual bytes.

              The gist of the problem is that you are trying to describe something
              that occurs outside of an xml document in a schema strictly aimed at
              defining xml documents.

              Hope that helps,
              --Wes

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Saha, Saikat [mailto:saikat.saha@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:42 AM
              To: 'soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com'
              Subject: RE: [soapbuilders] Round4 DIME doc/lit WSDL issue

              Hi,

              I have pointed same issue to Simon few weeks back and we had a long
              thread
              on this issue. I completely agree with you that this has to be an
              extension.

              Thanks,
              Saikat

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Stanislav Opichal [mailto:stop@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 5:41 AM
              To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [soapbuilders] Round4 DIME doc/lit WSDL issue


              Hi All!

              During writting a documentation for DIME support I found that the
              http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/dime-doc.wsdl specification contains
              this complexType declaration:

              <complexType name="ReferencedBinary">
              <simpleContent>
              <restriction base="xsd:base64Binary">
              <annotation>
              <appinfo>
              <content:mediaType value="application/octetstream"/>
              </appinfo>
              </annotation>
              <attribute ref="ref:location" use="optional"/>
              </restriction>
              </simpleContent>
              </complexType>

              Isn't it wrong according to the XML Schema specification? IMHO there
              should be extension used instead of the restriction.

              best regards

              Stop

              --
              Stanislav Opichal
              WASP C++ Senior Engineer
              Systinet (formerly Idoox)
              http://www.systinet.com



              -----------------------------------------------------------------
              This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
              implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.

              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



              -----------------------------------------------------------------
              This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
              implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.

              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.