Re: OT: Re: [Chicken-users] rails-like framework

[F. Wittenberger]

sorry, this was meant to be sent to the mailing list, not private

Am Montag, den 24.04.2006, 12:46 +0200 schrieb Jörg F. Wittenberger:
> Am Montag, den 24.04.2006, 08:21 +0200 schrieb felix winkelmann:
> > Jörg, what would be needed to port Askemos to Chicken
> > (not that I have time for this, but I'd like to know anyway... ;-)
> > 
> > ?
> 
> I placed a tarball at the askemos web site, which contains an directory
> with chicken modules and makefile.  This directory used to build about
> 30 month ago.  I'm afraid it will no longer.
> 
> There are a few things, which should probably be redone.  The sandbox
> interpreter, UTF-8 come to mind.  C FFI work: sha256, libmagic, sqlite.
> Many things will be API glue code.  Also persistent storage: rscheme has
> pstore, chickens evict might be helpful to reduce load time.  But that's
> less priority, since it's optional.  Furthermore I'm pretty sure that
> more issues will pop up as we go.  I recall e.g., the leventhshein egg
> not deploying some obvious optimisation and beeing deadly incompatible
> with user level threading.  I vaguely recall apparent slow i/o on
> chicken and never could pin it down and I recall askemos/ball triggering
> some age old bug in rscheme's i/o and pstore code.  Who knows what's
> coming next.
> 
> A real problem will be how to implement time constraints for certain
> operations.  There are two kind of operations, which may need to
> asynchronous termination: network activity and user supplied code.  In
> any case, we need to make sure the dynamic wind stack is properly
> cleaned.  This is an open questions for rscheme too: if the timeout
> exception is raised during the execution of the post hook of a dynamic
> wind, just before the actual post hooks code is executed, the post hook
> is not executed at all, which ist just the opposite of the intention.  I
> guess: Felix, here we depend on you anyway.  ;-/
> 
> Cheers
> 
> /Jörg
> 
> > 
> > 
> > cheers,
> > felix
> > 
> > On 4/22/06, Jörg F. Wittenberger <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > Am Samstag, den 22.04.2006, 17:09 +0200 schrieb Peter Bex:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 04:21:02PM +0200, J?rg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > I've taken a look at the Askemos webpage and read your description a
> > > > number of times, but I can't really grasp *what* Askemos is exactly.
> > > > Is it an operating system, a language, a web development framework, a
> > > > system to make concurrent programming reliable or a system that makes
> > > > it easy to use a number of redundant servers?  Or is it all of these
> > > > things?
> > >
> > > It's all of these.  Well the easy part is still sort of questionable.
> > > Depends on what you compare.
> > >
> > > If you look at it from 3000 feet, you see an operating system, because
> > > an operating system manages computer resources.  As such it has been
> > > hard all the times to distinguish between operating system and language
> > > implementation.  As long as we talk about assembler or C, things are
> > > clear, but when you add threads and garbage collection, the difference
> > > blurs away.  At the other hand: expect funny reactions when telling
> > > people "this OS is written in Scheme".
> > >
> > > If you look at it as an application developer, you always see it though
> > > some HTTP/S request response scheme.  So web dev framework applies.
> > > Since that's what we do to make our living, this aspect gets better over
> > > time.
> > >
> > > So it's a reliable distributed - ähm, uh... - app server?
> > >
> > > Actually Askemos is only the concept: all objects (be them documents or
> > > processes) of a legal system (to be modelled) are represented at a
> > > "place" (which is basically an agent/object, serves as either deed, file
> > > or process).  Certain properties are ensured by the agreement protocol:
> > > clear authorship, tamper proofed, no rights escalation, no corruption,
> > > agreed execution.  There's a VM, which defines how processes are
> > > executed.  Beeing XML it's as language and hardware independent as it
> > > can get.  Anything would be better but that's why XML is the worst
> > > common denominator everybody accepts as readable.  (The
> > > "Justizkommunikationsgesetz" [would this be "justice comunication
> > > act" ??] for instance defines for Germany that XML would be acceptable.
> > > Not much else.)
> > >
> > > Beyond the VM-Level we stop talking about Askemos itself.  There are two
> > > more levels the protocol (http+extension) and the implementation (ball).
> > > If we distinguish these, we come closer to the questions.
> > >
> > > Yes, this should be visible at the web site.  Thanks for asking.
> > >
> > > Hm, now I'm in trouble: one says "drop the ball part" from the page,
> > > here it's back.
> > >
> > > > I'm sorry if I sound stupid and I don't mean to insult, but I really
> > > > don't understand what Askemos does.  I think I speak for everyone here
> > > > if I say that we want a system that is *easy* to hack.  It should be
> > > > simple and lightweight, just like Chicken itself.  What makes Scheme
> > > > interesting is that it's small enough to fit in your head and
> > > > nevertheless is powerful enough to do anything you want.  A web
> > > > framework in Scheme should have the same qualities.
> > >
> > > Agreed.  That's our goal as well.  At the application level it's not
> > > that hard.  All you do usually: put all you stuff in a webdav folder.
> > > Start on of you Scheme scripts as a process and you are done.  There's
> > > no principal difference to other frame works.  Except for completeness.
> > >
> > > If you need to access C libraries or other compiled code, you need to
> > > export it properly.  Not too hard either, I'd say.
> > >
> > > Let's put it that way: once they got it up and running, a few people
> > > liked it.  That's good and bad: good for as relative success, bad for
> > > the total amount.
> > >
> > > But it runs single host as well.  And that is at least supposed to work
> > > out of the box.
> > >
> > > /Jörg
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Chicken-users mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
> > >
> >