Hi,<div><br></div><div>did you consider using swank protocol?</div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div><br></div><div>Vsevolod</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Yakov Zaytsev <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:zaytsev.yakov@gmail.com">zaytsev.yakov@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Hello, all<br>
<br>
I again have a scenario as follows. Say, you have an enterprise-y or<br>
CAD-y application. From one side, you extend it in Lisp. Be it a<br>
plugin (i.e. LISPWORKS:DELIVER with :DLL-EXPORTS) or standalone Lisp<br>
process which communicates with the application via some provided SDK<br>
APIs; these two cases do not actually differ for us.<br>
>From the other side, you have your own fat Lisp application which you<br>
want to communicate with the plugin. Example: NPAPI plugin provides<br>
data for later processing by big Lisp.<br>
Here is a problem arises. How to pass sexps as transparently between<br>
the two Lisps as possible? Yeah, I programmed in Erlang for some time.<br>
Basically, I want that kind of &quot;transparency&quot;, though I don&#39;t thing<br>
that it definitely must be message passing between quasi-processes..<br>
There are might be some variations but I guess you got the idea<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
pro mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:pro@common-lisp.net">pro@common-lisp.net</a><br>
<a href="http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro" target="_blank">http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>