-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 21 January 2006 21:26, Jon Egil Strand wrote:

It's easier than that, just make use of cmdow:
http://www.commandline.co.uk/cmdow/

But I think it would be better if you had a DLL instead of a .EXE and you 
could call the functions in the DLL instead of running the .EXE.

> For a customer I'm building a GUI for a analytical application. The
> analytical algorithm is confidential and implemented in a seperate .exe
> program.  However I am very pleased to have the customer agreeing to build
> all of the surrounding application in Ruby.
>
> The problem comes when calling the .exe program from my GUI-application.
> As of today I simply use the bactick operator to call the .exe with
> appropriate input:
>
>      result = `calculate.exe 1,2,3,4,5,6 `
>
> The result from calculate.exe is written to screen and stored as result.
> On a typical run, a couple hundred of these are executed, and everything
> works fine except one simple detail:
>
> Every calculation opens and closes a unique DOS-window.
>
> No need to elaborate, you all understand how 200 blinking DOS-windows does
> not look good. The number to aim for here is 0. How can this be done?
>
> Ideas:
>   I) Spawn each execution in the background.
>   II) Don't communicate over write to screen / read from screen
>     - SOAP?
>     - XML-RPC?
>     - CORBA?
>   III) Windows service?
>
> Some degrees of freedom exist as the customer is quite skilled and willing
> to make _some_ modifications. calculate.exe is written in c#.
>
> If anyone has any ideas, I would be very glad for all suggestions.
>
> All the best
> Jon Egil Strand

- -- 
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(En general no puedo contestar antes de 10 ds)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD0pyE/DzYv9iGJzsRArU0AJ4kk9FFlYEmfIt7x7nevUD/+PIhZgCgkWS+
bFrLrrzqhuWY3CSVACyfszU=
=4ZEo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----