Skip to content

The SimpleLocalnet backend should take (RemoteTable -> RemoteTable) rather than RemoteTable #52

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
edsko opened this issue Oct 22, 2012 · 1 comment
Closed

The SimpleLocalnet backend should take (RemoteTable -> RemoteTable) rather than RemoteTable #52

edsko opened this issue Oct 22, 2012 · 1 comment
Assignees
@hyperthunk
Labels
Bug
Milestone
distributed-proce...

Comments

@edsko
Copy link
Member

edsko commented Oct 22, 2012

This avoids the need for Control.Distributed.Process.Node in applications that use it.
@ghost ghost assigned hyperthunk Jan 28, 2013
@qnikst
Copy link
Contributor

qnikst commented Jun 18, 2015

Moved to #396

@qnikst qnikst closed this as completed Jun 18, 2015
LaurentRDC pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 31, 2024
@facundominguez
Merge pull request #52 from avieth/avieth/limit_length
3d5994c 
Optional limits on address and data length
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@hyperthunk hyperthunk

Labels
Bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
distributed-process-simplelocalnet-0.2.1
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@hyperthunk @qnikst @edsko