[REBOL] Re: Rugby doco - wip
From: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 29-Jan-2002 6:04
Romano Paolo Tenca wrote:
> Hi, Brett
> > Thus a big difference for understanding the two is that:
> > * View makes an event "concrete" using objects and it dispatches
> > these events to developer defined functions.
> > *Rugby "eats" the event and instead focusses on providing a
> > pidgeon hole (ticket) for the function results.
> > This means that currently a Rugby developer has to, in effect, re-create the
> > consumed event through polling. I wonder then, if Rugby provided a
> > dispatch system, whether it would be more understandable. Please note,
> > I'm quite unaware of the impact on the Rugby design this idea implies.
> Is this what you want?
> - client send a request to the server port and ask for an anwer on a given
> - client go to wait on his port
> - server awakes for the client request and makes what the request asked
> - server send an answer to the client port
> - server wait
> - client awakes because receveis the answer
> So the "ticket" should be only a client port to wait for.
> This is the mode in which async code was executed by ARexx on old Amiga.
That's nice, excempt, imo, above scenario looses capability of getting thru
firewall, because of custom = non 80 port Rugby is supposed to connect back to.