World: r3wp

Looks like I'm going to have a very few pages as entry points to 
the application ... and so all the code will only be in a few pages.

Anyone got a suggestion on how to modularise the app even more ..

I guess the more general question is how does one write large apps 
in RSP ...

the same way you would a normal rebol app? there isn't much difference 
to RSP from running functions in a console.

Think about RSP as just the display layer. Your application should 
be in .r script like you would do for any other REBOL app.

The View in MVC?

Right.

Ok, that makes sense ... I didn't want 10 pages of code between <% 
%> !

Build your app as it could have an alternative VID UI instead or 
just HTML.

That would be bad pratice.

well, I guess there isn't much published on what is good practice 
on writing RSP pages :)

And i've never done PHP etc

True, but's it's no different from best pratices in ASP, JSP,...

No experience with any of those either ... but I've got a clue now 
:)

What exactly is the difference between 'do and '*do ?

ie. when should I use '*do ?

'*do is just the native DO.

I know

So, why should I need to fall back to '*do ?

Webapps are, from v 19, contained in their own context (object!). 
'do will first bind the loaded code to the webapp context before 
executing it.

and if you're not using a webapp?

*do is just a fallback, if 'do is crashing your code ;-). It should 
be used, but as I had some context issues while testing with my own 
webapps, I've added it as a workaround while figuring out how to 
fix those issues.

if the RSP is not inside a webapp, then 'do will just call the native 
do.

Ok.  Thx

it should = it shouldn't

need R3

badly

That's why I was calling since the beginning of R3, for a focus on 
R3 Core features first, to be able to port our R2 code to R3 and 
benefit from modules (and other vital features like plugins). We 
reached PITS limits a long time ago.

I guess,most here are the same opinion

Anyone got a suggestion on how to modularise the app even more...

QM?

Uses RSP, and I think it can use some of Cheyenne's features too...

I was waiting for your input Chris!  Have you tested this out?

Tested -- yes it works.  I haven't had a chance to check installation 
against the latest version of Cheyenne though.

Please report back when you do ...

I'm not sure when I'll get the chance -- you can try the current 
installation procedure, ymmv...

Ok, it does work with version 0.9.18 (source version only)

we're up to 9.19 now

I'm still having problems with RSP not working every few days :(

Isn't software development fun!

Does it happen when you restart Cheyenne ?

Are you running several RSP webapps on the same server ?

not working
 means not responding or giving an error ?

I normally just reboot ... perhaps I need to find a cleaner way of 
killing the cheyenne process.
No, just the one RSP webapp.
Not responding.

I usually kill it here and start it again. For those times where 
it mysteriously just quits, I can also just start it again. I have 
mine set up via launchd in OSX.

This is not so good then .. is there a way we can debug this?

Or is it just Cheyenne reaching it's pool limit?

Henrik, are you running RSP, or CGI ?

RSP

It's a bug, but hard to fix because I can't reproduce it. The only 
way to fix it would be to log into a  Cheyenne server in blocked 
state, using the rconsole client.

So, if one of you can provide me with an access to a server in such 
state, I should be able to investigate on that issue.