I am sorry I gave an impression that I was complaining. I just thought it was logical to do so if every server has its own dispatch-table. There is probably a reason why it's done differently so I wanted to understand why.
I am sure, if I come up with something useful I'll make a patch and send it to the list. Currently I am just a beginner trying to learn lisp and you guys are awesome in what you do for the community and for me personally.
Thank you,
Andrew
On 4/12/07, Edi Weitz <edi@agharta.de> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 16:13:20 -0400, "Andrei Stebakov" <lispercat@gmail.com> wrote:
> So I need to keep track of all servers that I start and for each one
> return it's dispatch-table something like this?:
> (defvar *server1* (start-server :port 3001....)
> (defvar *server2* (start-server :port 3002....)
> (setq *meta-dispatcher* (lambda (server)
> (declare (ignore server))
> (if (eql server *server1*) *dispatch-table1* *dispatch-table2*)))
No, you don't have to do it like this. There are certainly more
intelligent ways to do it. I'd use something like
(lambda (server)
(case (server-local-port server)
(3001 *dispatch-table1*)
(3002 *dispatch-table2*)))
> Why can't start-server take a dispatch-table as a parameter?
Did you read my last reply?
If there's a feature in an open source project you want to have that's
not provided, you can hack it yourself and send a patch, or you can
pay someone else to do it, or you can complain about it on the mailing
list. You can try to figure out yourself which of these alternatives
is the most promising.
_______________________________________________
tbnl-devel site list
tbnl-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/tbnl-devel