Originally posted by lfroen
man-in-the-middle client translating our ECv2 protocol to the xml-rpc
Nothing bad, and the man is definitly welcome to write a client translating EC to whatever he thinks is right/good/useful.
BUT: I never met people that like to read xml, so output is gonna to fed to some program. Now it's time when I fail to see what is it good for (except for execsizing coders skills).
Whoever sees things differently may educate me.
Every time I mention XML-RPC, people often comment that 'all that weird angle-bracket syntax will put people off'. Therein is one of the myths of XML-RPC.
True - requests and responses are XML-encoded and sent via an HTTP POST request/response cycle.
However, XML-RPC is implemented as a high-level library in almost all of the common languages - C, C++, Python, Ruby, Java, OCaml, Perl etc, and the respective APIs for those languages don't expose the client programmer to a single angle-bracket.
The beauty of XML-RPC is that it wraps objects in a language-agnostic way, permitting the implementation of clients in any language.
Python's XML-RPC API is especially elegant - in a large part, the wrapped objects look and feel just like native Python objects. And in Java, and C++, it's almost as luxurious. In C, there's a bit of red tape to go through, but nothing that doesn't come up in routine C programming anyway.
IMHO, perhaps the best place to implement an XML-RPC interface might be within amuleweb, since amuleweb already implements HTTP POST, the underlying transport for XML-RPC.
Cheers
aum