From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA10062; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:15:25 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA13229 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:15:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from aomori.annexia.org (annexia.force9.co.uk [212.56.101.183]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h8PHFN524419 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:15:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from rich by aomori.annexia.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1A2Zi5-00048T-00; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:15:21 +0100 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:15:21 +0100 To: Anastasia Gornostaeva Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] dns client Message-ID: <20030925171521.GA15869@redhat.com> References: <20030925153529.GA36210@ermine.home> <20030925155119.GA14079@redhat.com> <20030925161708.GA36499@ermine.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030925161708.GA36499@ermine.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i From: Richard Jones X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 0400,:01 erlang:01 otp:99 non-unix:01 clue:01 freshmeat:01 ltd:98 bindings:01 bindings:01 ocaml:01 sep:01 arch:02 unix:02 boot:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 08:17:08PM +0400, Anastasia Gornostaeva wrote: > Well, it is an interesting solution. but what about portability? > I saw, Erlang/OTP has more nice solution - a module inet_res that allows some > kinda of my requests above. Well there are two issues here: how much portability do _you_ need? and how portable would bindings to a C library be? If you specifically need this to work on multiple (Unix + non-Unix) systems, then using open_process_in/popen wouldn't be the way to go. However I cannot answer that question, only you can. Would C bindings to the bind resolver library be any more portable I wonder? (Actually I don't have the faintest clue whether this library is available on Windows). A pure OCaml resolver library would be a massive chunk of work, and pretty pointless to boot. Rich. -- Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://freshmeat.net/users/rwmj Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - all your business data are belong to you. MONOLITH is an advanced framework for writing web applications in C, easier than using Perl & Java, much faster and smaller, reusable widget-based arch, database-backed, discussion, chat, calendaring: http://www.annexia.org/freeware/monolith/ ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners