IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] GRASP API in C?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sat, 25 March 2017 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB2A128BBB for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ahP8TtDAyOA5 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95F37126C26 for <anima@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 181E1203B2; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:45:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE0F636E0; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:21:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
cc: Anima WG <anima@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <c6b37895-beea-ea25-0c8a-b9afd92d3ce7@gmail.com>
References: <83c2beba-2ad5-eb1d-b188-fe2d9e688391@gmail.com> <9809.1490283823@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <76345f98-758c-49a1-f1cd-9bb50c3c757e@gmail.com> <18940.1490381204@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <298db127-0970-68ee-dda6-0a9c0c625041@gmail.com> <8914.1490395600@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <c6b37895-beea-ea25-0c8a-b9afd92d3ce7@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 12:21:53 -0400
Message-ID: <15347.1490458913@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/5O5p81MdmjhSBM8N1KMQ4dNZXpM>
Subject: Re: [Anima] GRASP API in C?
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 16:21:57 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > It doesn't
    >> deal well with flexible types either, a dangerous luxury in > Python
    >> that I've got very fond of. But it seems to me that if a GRASP > core
    >> implementation is written in C for efficiency, it will *need* to >
    >> offer an API in C that higher level languages can build on.
    >>
    >> No, because it will be monolithic: not part of a library, no sockets
    >> API, etc.

    > It can't be monolithic in a general-purpose device with a variety of
    > ASAs sharing a discovery cache, flood cache, etc. Well, I'll show you

Exactly: it can't be monolithic on a general-purpose device.
When it's not a general-purpose device, that's when writing it in C will be
required.

    >> My understanding is that uPython is getting significant traction in
    >> some constrained environments: someone may want to rewrite your code
    >> to this very limited subset (less than python 2, I'm told).  I think
    >> that this is more likely to be a "library" than any C code.

    > I know nothing about uPython. I did look at downgrading my code to
    > Python 2 but quickly gave up because, well, Python 3 is better. So it
    > all depends on what they've kept and what they've removed in uPython.

I don't know much about it either.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email