XML-RPC

Jonas,

That is really excellent if you already have a functional xml-rpc profile.  
The aim of my project is not to build a new protocol, but to implement the 
security features of BEEP/sasl/tls and stay away from http and browsers.  In 
particular, I am trying to create an application that performs a secure 
management/transfer of medical records over a WAN which also includes remote 
internet access.  I want my application to have all the security features 
built-in so that it doesn't rely on a network that may be poorly setup or 
poorly managed.

If you already have a functional xml-rpc profile, then I may start using that 
and stop converting the EasySoap++ software into a loadable library.  That 
would allow me to get to work on my user application, since what I am really 
after is just secure rpc capabilities over BEEP.  Converting C++ to a dynamic 
library is kind of messy but not impossible.  I was testing this over the 
weekend.  In order to prevent name mangling, you have to create a virtual 
superclass and then add class factories to create and destroy pointers to 
class objects.  Converting C libraries for use in a C++ program is much 
easier, just make all C functions accessible with "extern "C" foo()" and the 
C++ program can read them. 

Another alternative is to use C++ as a procedural language like C using the 
extern "C" keyword for all the C++ functions.  The disadvantage of that is 
you don't get to use OO features in C++.  The advantage is that you can use 
the functions as wrappers for other C++ code like the Qt toolkit without name 
mangling.  

Of course the best situation is to just use libraries written in C.  I suppose 
I could just statically compile the C++ libraries into my project, but I am 
determined to make it as modular as possible.

Scott