All three approaches you outlined are viable but web service is easiest to set up.
>From what you described, it seems it would be a low-performance use for Racket and only simple data structures will be passed back and forth on an infrequent basis. Web service would be a good fit for that. Out of the last two approaches, the COM approach seems to me to be the better one. Although I have never used it, Racket provides MzCOM and .NET comes with additional support for interacting with COM from within the .NET environment. It would allow you to tightly integrate Racket into your application, pass complex data back and forth and achieve higher performance throughout, but likely it would be more work. I've used COM in the past for C++ applications; in those projects it was always a lot of work to configure and integrate COM. I would try setting up a web service first and if it's not adequate for whatever reason (performance, business requirements, etc) then I would try the COM approach. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
