[REBOL] Re: Rugby-core syntax
From: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 11-Feb-2002 11:16
> Some clarifications:
> - the tcp://:port-no is close to REBOLs syntax for opening a server port.
> This is especially important when you have multiple network interfaces in a
> machine, so that you can do tcp://:networkif-of-your-choice:portnumber
> So that's why it won't change.
But ... :-)) No, really, just kidding. OTOH - take it from user's perspective -
what other network interface are you talking about here? Maybe it is just me not
understanding something. If you open tcp://:9005 listen port, you can't open any
http://:9005 or xml-rpc://:9005 on the same one. Or what do you mean by multiple
network interfaces here? And after all - as you said - it is transparent, so
stating serve/with-port [echo] 9005 would be clean too ...
> - No security refinements. Currently the security framework is completely
> independant of the real rugby core (rexec). It builds on top of that. The
> only thing in rugby that knows about sexec is the part tha builds stubs, but
> that may change as well. The upside of this that you can remove touchdown_*
> from the modules and the build script, and you have a smaller Rugby that
> still works. The downside is that you don't have /secure as a refinement but
> some extra functions (3).
well, it is still solvable, isn't it? what about following:
rexec: func [params /secure][
if secure call-sexec-with-func-args ....
> That is not to say that you may not add your own wrappers and submit them to
> me ;-)
> - Rugby seems somewhat slower, but that is not the compression (although that
> may be useless in some cases)
OK, is every Rugby packet compressed or just Rugby headers? I think that it
makes sense to compress stubs (textual info), but not data, because if you will
compress some already compressed data (mp3. jpg, other), you can grow in size and
'compress itself will surely add to total communication time. I think that
compression of data can be left to user level functions ...
btw I tried to remove 'compress and 'decompress from 'compose and 'decompose
functions, but was getting an error. I wanted to measure a difference ...
> but the http part. OTOH, http provides complete
> transparency by default, without any pain if you have a REBOL supported
> proxy/firewall. If I make all off these things configurable you end up with a
> Websphere, and that's *not* what I want.
Isn't Webshpere a professional product, done by professionals, sold by
professional company? :-)
> And yes, Rugby is my software, but you are free to clone and abuse. That's
> why the BSD license is there.
I see no point in separate release. Rugby is young. If I am not comfort with
something, I will let you know, along with my reasoning, examples, etc.
PS: I looked at mobile code, but it does not seem to be modified to work with
latest rugby, or does it?