I'm developing client-server application on haxe. I want client side to be compiled to javascript from haxe, but there is a big chance, that other languages will be also needed. I cannot find universal way of doing it. Though, I can make it with websockets, when it comes to jabascript, and on haxe Sockets, in every other language.
So question is: is there a way to make a client-server application on haxe, without branching code for different platforms?
What you are looking for is Haxe Remoting, which is part of the Standard Library
Haxe remoting is a way to communicate between different platforms. With Haxe remoting, applications can transmit data transparently, send data and call methods between server and client side.
relevant sources:
http://haxe.org/manual/std-remoting.html
http://api.haxe.org/haxe/remoting/
As side note, if you are looking into creating a actual website with client/server in one project you might want to look into http://www.ufront.net
Related
What I want to do: I want to add communication capabilities to a couple of applications (soon to be jar libraries for Java) in Scala, and I want to do it in the most painless way, with no Tomcat, wars, paths for GET requests, RPC servers, etc.
What I have done: I've been checking a number of libraries, like Jetty, JAX-RS, Jackson, etc. But then I see the examples and they usually involve many different folders for configuration, WSDL files, etc. Most of the examples lack a main method and I don't have a clear picture about how many additional requirements may they have (e.g. Tomcat).
What I am planning to do: I'm considering to simply open a socket on the "server" to listen, then connect with the "client" and transfer some JSON, in both directions. This should be fairly standard so that I can use other programming languages in compatible ways (e.g. Python).
What I am asking: I would like to know whether there is some library that makes this easier. Not necessarily using raw sockets, but setting up some process communication in just a few lines, maybe not as simple as Node.js, but something similar.
Bonus: It would be cool to
be able to use other programming languages (e.g. Python) by using open standards
have authentication
But I don't really need any of those at this point.
I think you need RPC client/server system, I would suggest to take one of these two:
Finagle - super flexible and powerful RPC client/server from Finagle. You can define your service with Thrift, and it will generate stubs for client/server in scala. With Thrift it should be straightforward to add Python support.
Spray - much smaller library, focused on creating REST services. It's not so powerful as Finagle, however much easier. And REST allows you to use any other clients
Remotely - an elegant RPC system for reasonable people. Interesting and very promising project, however maybe difficult to start with because of extensive Scalaz+Shapeless+Macro usage
Honestly if you want something that is cross-language compatible, simple, straightforward, and concise then you do not want to use plain old sockets!
Check out dropwizard. It is amazing and I use it for small and large projects alike! It is usually configured by no more than a single configuration file. It supports authentication too!
Out of the box it gives you really great inter-process communication over JSON (using Jackson) and much much more. There is also pretty decent Scala support for dropwizard.
If you must roll your own then I'd recommend using Jackson for JSON parsing. It's super simple to use and also has great scala support.
If you've got a "controlled" use case where the client and server are on the same LAN and deployed in tandem, I'd (controversially) recommend Java RMI; it's dumb and JVM-specific (and uses a Java-specific protocol), but it's very simple to use.
If you need something more robust and cross-language, I'd recommend Apache Thrift. You write your interfaces in a platform-independent interface definition language, and it's very clear which changes are compatible and which are not; the thrift compiler generates skeleton interfaces for you to use, and then you just write an implementation of that interface and a couple of lines to start the server (as you can see from the example on the homepage). It's also got good support for async implementations if you need the performance. Thrift itself is reasonably standard and cross-platform, with its own binary protocol, or you can use JSON as a transport if you really want to (I'd recommend against that though).
RabbitMQ provides one easy way to do what you want without writing a server and implementing your own persistence, flow control, authentication, etc. You can brew or apt-get install it.
You start up a broker daemon process (i.e. manages message queues)
In the Scala producer, you can use Maven-provided Java API to send JSON strings without any fuss (e.g. no definition languages) to specified queues
Then in your other Scala program, connect to the broker, and listen for messages on the queue, and parse the incoming JSON
Because it is so popular, there are many tutorials online for different patterns you may want to use to distribute the messages, e.g. pub/sub, one-to-one, exactly-once delivery, etc.
I'm interested in creating a web application and I've just done some research on the what makes a good web server. I've search through the facebook, twitter and foursquare. They share what software they used to build their infrastructure.
For me, some of the software used are new. I'd like to ask some questions here.
why create a back end server, isn't a web server running PHP is enough? Why use java/scala for backend? Do we really need RPC framework such as thrift/protocol buffer? What is that RPC framework used for? Is it used for communication between frontend and backend servers?
Really appreciate for those who answer my questions, or if there's some books you would suggest me to read.
Thank you.
It sounds as though you'd like to build a scalable backend infrastructure that ultimately will be used to do the following:
Serve content. This is the web server layer.
Perform some type of back end processing for user requests
coming in from the web server layer and communicate with the data store. Call this the application server layer.
Save session state and user data in a distributed, fault tolerant, eventually consistent key value store.
Also, it sounds as though you want to do this using commodity PC hardware.
This is a tall order.
Foursquare uses Scala with the Lift framework, jetty for their web server. Here's more. And more.
Facebook uses many different technologies. I know that for their data store they use HBase (they were using Cassandra)
Yahoo uses HBase to keep track of user statistics.
Twitter started as a Ruby-backend web site. They moved to Scala. Twitter is incrementally moving from mysql (I assume sharded) to Cassandra using their proprietary incremental database conversion tool.
As far as scaling on the application server and web server end, I know that what really counts is having a language that has the ability to spawn new user processes in user space and a manager process that assigns new worker processes the requests coming in. Think of it as running a very efficient company. The more work you've got coming in, the more people you hire. This is the Actor model. Some languages have actors built in,(erlang) others have actors implemented as frameworks(akka) or libraries (Scala native). Apparently, Scala's native actors are buggy so some people got together and implemented the akka framework for Scala and Java. There's a lot of discussion online regarding actors and which language and libraries one should use. Erlang has a lot going for it out of the box, however, Scala runs in the JVM and allows you to reuse a lot of the existing Java web libraries (which could have some issue if they happen to have static objects declared in them) Erlang has actors and the OTP libraries, but apparently does not have the rich libraries that Java has. So, for me it really boils down to Scala (with akka) or Erlang.
For the web server, with Scala, you can use any java app server. Foursquare uses jetty for most things. It's not written in Scala, but since Scala compiles down to bytecode that runs on the JVM it easily interops with any java app server.
People also say that there aren't that many Erlang programmers and that Erlang is harder to learn (functional programming vs imperative programming) Scala is functional and imperative at the same time (meaning you can do either)
Erlang is functional. Now, functional programming has a lot of things going for it as one expert functional programmer can get a lot more done than an expert imperative programmer. Yahoo stores was originally written and maintained in Lisp (functional language) by one man. On the other hand, imperative programming is easier to learn and used widely in a team setting. Imperative languages are good for some things, functional languages for
others. The right tool for the right job.
Back to the web server discussion, with Erlang, you can use yaws or you can run a framework (Chicago Boss)
Here's more on the Scala vs Erlang debate.
Another link.
More here.
And another.
Another opinion.
On the database end, you have a lot of choices. See here.
You can even eschew the database all-together and save your data in mnesia (Erlang's runtime data store)
My answer is not complete as this topic (scaling app servers, databases and web servers) is very complicated and full of debate. Some frameworks even blur the tiers (web server, application server, database) distinction and integrate a lot of the functionality of these layers within the framework itself.
For example, I encounter a lot of problems developing complex webapp using PHP only. PHP has no threads, php is lacking many good things that has scala, or another good modern language with rich syntax. PHP is slow comparing to compiled JVM language. PHP is less secure in my opinion. It is good to get a bunch of data and render as HTML page, but processing for high load is not its plus. RPC as you suggest serves as communication layer.
I've recently decided to take on a pretty big software engineering project that will involve developing a client-server based application. My plan is to develop as many clients as possible: including native iPhone, Android and Blackberry Apps as well as a web-based app.
For my server I'm planning on using a VPS (possibly from slicehost.com) running a flavor of Linux with a MySQL database. My first question is what should be my strategy for clients to interface with the server. My ideas are:
HTTP-POST or GET based communication with a PHP script.
This is something I'm very familiar with - passing information to a PHP script from a form, working with it and returning output. I'm assuming I'd want to return output to clients as some sort of XML or JSON based string. I'm also assuming I'd want to create a well defined API for clients that want to interface with my server.
Socket based communication with either a PHP script, Java program, or C++ program
This I'm less familiar with. I've worked with basic tutorials on creating a script or simple application that creates a socket, listens for a connection and returns data. I'm assuming there is far less communication data-overhead with this method than an HTTP based method. My dream is for there to be A LOT of concurrent clients in use, all working with the server/database. I'm not sure if a simple HTTP/PHP script based communication design can scale effectively to meet the needs of many clients. Also, I may eventually want the capability of a Server-Push to clients triggered by various server events. I'm also unsure of what programming language is best suited for this. If efficiency is a big concern I'd imagine a PHP script might not be efficient enough?
Is there a commonly accepted way of doing this? For me this is an attempt to bridge a gap between some of my current skills. I have a lot of experience with PHP and interfacing with a MySQl database to serve dynamic web pages. I also have a lot of experience developing native iPhone applications (however none that have had any significant server-based communication). Also I've worked with Java/C++, and I've developed applications in both languages that have interfaced with MySQL.
I don't anticipate my clients sending/receiving a tremendous amount of data to/from a server. Something on par with a set of strings per a given client-side event.
Another question: Using a VPS - good idea? I obviously don't want to pay for a full-dedicated server (slicehost offers a VPS starting at ~ $20/month), and I'm assuming a VPS will be capable of meeting the requirements of a few initial clients. As more and more users begin to interface with my server, I'm assuming it will be possible to migrate to larger and larger 'slices' and possibly eventually moving to a full-dedicated server if necessary.
Thanks for the advice! :)
I'd say go with the simplicity of HTTP, at least until your needs outgrow its capabilities. (The more stateful your application needs to be, the less HTTP fits).
For low cost and scalability, you probably can't go wrong with a cloud like Rackspace's or Amazon's. But I'm just getting started with those, my servers have been VPSs from tektonic until now.
Is there a distributed application framework (commercial is okay as well) that supports iPhone / iPad ?
What I'm looking for in the framework:
Allows me to focus on the application logic
I don't have to code "low-level" network programming (I've done it too many times that I dont wanna do it again =p)
Should be actively maintained (popular would be nice)
Basically, I can then develop faster.
We plan to develop a soft real-time TCP/IP client/server application where there are many iPhone/iPad clients (30+) connected to single server over LAN. The server most likely will run Windows (unless the framework does not support it).
I've been looking around and I see:
MonoTouch WCF (still looks quite raw ?)
RemObjects (Mono + Objective-C)
Cocoa Distributed Objects
ZeroC Ice Touch (Objective-C)
RakNet ( ? included because it mentions iPhone, but will need to use C++)
Of course, there's also the option of using the plain old MonoTouch System.Net.Sockets
Or, CFNetwork (I dont plan to use this one)
I'm still deciding whether to use Objective-C or MonoTouch, but leaning towards MonoTouch since we will get the .NET framework, and not be tied into just the Mac world.
Please feel free to comment if I added anything that's not related to my question---I'm new to iPhone/iPad world.
We've used WCF/Monotouch with great success - there are some areas of the f/work that arent 100% but for most cases you should find working with WCF on monotouch a breeze.
The ability to share all of our data sync, model, tests etc between monodroid and monotouch and wm7 is seriously cool (with some working - this is easilly possible - you'll need to manage multiple prj files).
Be careful to manage calls to wcf services correctly, keep them to a minimum, keep the archetecture simple. We ended up with a fairly complex dto to minimise the amount of calls to the wcf services to sync the data - this was well worth it as the time needed to sync a device from scratch is now a fraction of what it was.
Using SSL to communicate with the server is a PITA but I think that's more a case of the way apple have managed it.
You need to be a bit more explicit on your requirements. If you need only object serialization (dehydration/hydration) over REST API, then anything that supports POX or JSON will work just fine for you. However, if you need RPC-style method invocation, with authentication, encryption/digital signature, transactions, etc, then you need one of those frameworks you listed above.
If you need a framework, I personally would lean towards the MonoTouch WCF, as it gives you the ability to move your client to other platforms later as well (Windows Phone 7 for example). Then again, as you said, it's a bit rough right now, and if Mono team decides in the future that they don't have the resources to invest in maintaining it, you might end up with having to move to another framework. Of course, there's also the drawback that you need to use MonoTouch for your application, and can't use Objective-C. Granted, with the recent changes in the iOS Developer Agreement, that's not that much of an issue, but it is still something to keep in mind.
(Disclaimer: I used to work on Microsoft's WCF team, so I am biased towards the product itself)
The other option I would go for, would be Cocoa Distributed Objects. However, that would be my choice if the server is also running on OS X. I know there's Bonjour for Windows, but I doubt it's optimized for server scenarios, and I also don't know how rich is Apple's RPC implementation on top of it for the Windows platform. So I would stay with Apple's technology only if I am building exclusively for Apple's platform.
Note that WCF and Distributed Objects would give you RPC-style functionality, but they won't help you with any particular scenarios. If you need/want even higher level of abstraction, for example you need presence information or multi-user chat, you will still need to implement those yourself. It might be worth at this point to look at frameworks that provide those features for you. An example would be RakNet (which you listed above), which abstracts the remoting level and builds additional features on top of it.
You can use JSON Touch + Vitche PHP Emission Framework which provides all server-side you need. Also you can use that Framework to access existing SOAP (WCF, Axis, etc) services.
You can use Google protocol buffers to implement RPC though you will need to do some network programming for transporting your messages anyway. It supports interface generation for C++, Java, Python and Objective-C and .NET so you can create a single set of RPC messages and get code for working with them for almost any mobile platform. Transport layer on your mobile platforms you will have to implement yourself.
http:// code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/ - main Protobuf page (C++, Java, Python)
http:// code.google.com/p/protobuf-net/ - Protobuf .NET mentioned in one of the comments
http:// code.google.com/p/metasyntactic/wiki/ProtocolBuffers - Protobuf for Obj-C
Has anybody done or seen a deployment of Apache Thrift in an iPhone app?
I am wondering if is a reasonable solution for a high-volume, low(er)-latency network service for iPhones compared to HTTP.
One noteworthy thing I found is a bug report about running Thrift on the iPhone, which seems to have been fixed. But that doesn't necessarily indicate that it's a done deal.
Thrift and HTTP aren't mutually exclusive. In fact thrift now ships with an HTTP transport implementation to use. It's also a really nice way to auto-generate server/client code that avoids a lot of marshalling/unmarshalling boilerplate while still being really fast. Its internal representation is basically binary JSON, so it's very similar to a RESTful web service (except being easier to code and much, much faster).
So... anyone able to answer the original question? If not, I'll dive in myself with thrift's included Cocoa support and see how it works on the iphone.
Just my two cents..
The accepted answer to this question, is an opinion to not use a technology, not an answer of whether it is possible.
Thrift, is an interface definition language, IDL, like Protobuf and Capt'n'Proto. They permit the definition of a client/server/server protocol which is platform agnostic. JSON and Plist don't provide the same level of type conformance.
Having previously lead an iOS team with 10Ms MAU using Google Protobuf v2.5 on iOS, Android, Windows, and server teams, I can attest that IDLs are great on mobile. Apple uses them for syncing iWork content.
My current team uses Thrift for iOS and Android clients, with a mostly Scala backend. I much prefer it to Protobuf.
We send Thrift payloads over HTTPS and WebSockets. Once you have defined (in Thrift) your our wire communication protocol (i.e. frame structure), it's very easy to evolve your APIs.
However, on iOS in particular there are some implementation issues. The current version of the library is quite poorly packaged, and if you hope to make an Objective-C framework (e.g. for iOS 8+), then you will not be able to out of the box with v0.9.2. This is because the library headers include local imports, (#import "TProtocol.h" instead of #import <Thrift/TProtocol.h>) with no umbrella headers. Worst of all, the Objective-C compiler generates very messy Objective-C classes, also including local imports from the Thrift library.
Some of these issues are pretty damning. It indicates to me that while use of an IDL is very much a good engineering decision, not many iOS teams are using Thrift, unless they're huge with the resources to write their own library.
I've always disliked frameworks that use a common interface definition that builds out both server and client code. It keeps both sides too much in lockstep where in reality server API changes must be very flexible in the versions of clients that are communicating with it.
There are helpful libraries that make JSON or PLIST communication over HTTP pretty easy, and decades of debugging and understanding the HTTP protocol and how to use it well. I would ignore that at your peril.
I have used thrift's objective c bindings for a large iPhone app with a few million users. As one of the posters mentioned we can use Http which gets the best of both worlds. However there is no asynchronous HTTP client for thrift. We had to build an event based wrapper to allow non-blocking I/O calls. The underlying layer still issues one call at a time which hit us in a big way because we have one server call that takes a long time but it does not block UI flow and another really fast one that does block UI flow. If the underlying layer is busy with the slow command our fast command just has to wait. I am trying to build asyc http in c++ which can then be used on the iPhone but that is someways off from being ready.
Thrift as an external API doesn't make sense. Use it internally rock and roll.