Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] why Rugby uses async I/O

From: m::koopmans2::chello::nl at: 23-May-2001 19:05

First of all, it's there and it's the best solution for what Rugby needs to do, IMHO. If it breaks with 3.0, too bad. It took me a day to write it, and if 3.0 improves the API it will take less than a day to change it. But 3.0 goes into the category "more than 6 months away", so I'll live on the edge for now. Second, Rebol is its own reflexive metalanguage. So once a thing like async I/O is there, the rest is syntactic sugar. Why change the API? Why not built on top? I know, this is the discussion you don't want (Holger), but I can always ask ;) I don't like the "don't use" mantra. If it's there you may use it at your own risk, once you know the risks. An API change is the least problem in a productive thing like REBOL. Lack of features is much more serious. So why should yourself in the foot (RT)? One more thing: copy/part on an async port seems to eat up memory (hence I use read-io), bug? Finally, I'll update Rugby to the 3.0 APIs once it gets here. Right now I am adding security for the Pro users, top-level mezzanines, and deferred client calls (non-blocking). Coming soon to a computer near you... I am looking into SOAP support. Any help there is appreciated! I am thinking of a CGI front-end that utilizes Rugby and provides SOAP marshaling. Once I have that we are ready to blow away .Not Speaking of publicity then :) --Maarten