Related
I have been trying to decide if my web project is a candidate for implementation using PSGI, but I don't really see what good it would do for my application at this stage.
I don't really understand all the fuss. To me PSGI seems like a framework that provides a common interface between different Apache modules which lets you move your application between them. e.g Easily move your application from running on mod_perl to fastcgi, and provide the application support for running on both options.
Is that right, or have I missed something?
As I and the team I am a part of not only develop the application, but also pretty much do maintenance and setup of servers I don't see the value for us of being able to run on fastcgi, cgi, and mod_perl, we do just fine with just mod_perl.
Have I misunderstood the PSGI functionality, or is it just not suitable for my project?
Forget the Apache bit. It's a way of writing your application so that the choice of webserver becomes less relevant. At $work we switched to Plack/PSGI after finding our app running with very high CPU load after upgrading to Apache2 - benchmarking various Apache configs and NYTProf'ing were unable to determine the reason, and using PSGI and the Starman webserver worked out much better for us.
Now everything is handled in one place by our PSGI app (URL re-writes, static content, expiry headers, etc) rather than Apache configuration, so it's a) Perl, and b) easily tested via our standard /t/ scripts. Also our tests are now testing exactly what a user sees, rather than just the basic app itself.
It may well not be relevant to you if you're happy with Apache and mod_perl, and I'm sure others will be able to give much better answers, but for us not having to deal with anything Apache-related again is such a relief in itself. The ease of testing, and the ability to just stick in a Data::Dumper and see what's going on rather than wrestling with ModRewrite and friends, is a great boon.
Borrowing from a recent blog post by chromatic, Why PSGI/Plack Matters (Testing), here's what it is:
It's a good idea borrowed from Python's WSGI and Ruby's Rack but made Perlish; it's a simple formalizing of a pattern of web application development, where the entry point into the application is a function reference and the exit point is a tuple of header information and a response body.
That's it. That's as simple as it can be, and that simplicity deceives a lot of people who want to learn it.
An important benefit is, ibid.,
Given a Plack application, you don't have to deploy to a web server—even locally—to test your application as if it were deployed … Plack and TWMP (and Plack::Test) use the well-defined Plack pattern to make something which was previously difficult into something amazingly easy. They're not the first and they won't be the last, but they do demonstrate the value of Plack.
Started wrote an answer and after 50 lines I deleted it. Simply because it is impossible tell (in short) why is PSGI extremely cool. I'm new in PSGI too, but zilion things now are much easier as before in my apache/mod_perl era.
I can give you next advices:
read the Plack advent calendar - all days, step-by-step. You must understand the basic philosophy, what is good on onions and so on... :)
search CPAN for "Plack::Middleware::" - and read the first few lines in each. Here are MANY. (Really should be somewhere some short overview for each one, unfortunately don't know any faster way. Simply it is good to know, what middlewares are already developed. (For example, you sure will need the Plack::Middleware::Session, or Plack::Middleware::Static and so on...)
read about Plack::Builder (already done, when you done with the advent calendar) :)
try write some apps with it and will find than Plack is like the first sex - now you didn't understand that you could live without it.
ps:
If was here something like "Perl Oscar", will sure nominating MyiagavaSan. :)
I currently have the need to execute prolog code in an application I am making. I am aware that Apple probably never would allow something like this in the App Store, but that is not the intention either. This is more a private project that will never reach the App Store.
Purpose
In this case prolog is used to describe an object (like for example a telephone) and its properties. The object will be drawn with OpenGL using coordinates specified in the prolog script. The reason for using prolog is that I need the ability to query the program about some of the features this object has, and prolog eases this a lot. Bottom line: I "need" to query a prolog script from my app.
Possible solutions
Embed an already existing implementation written in C. I am unsure if this will even work.
Execute the prolog code on another machine and use the network to query prolog.
It seems that it is possible to run some sort Ruby VM inside the app (shinycocos uses this as far as I understand), could this be used to run one of the Ruby Prolog implementations?
Find some alternative to Prolog. This needs to give me some of the same possibilities I get with prolog.
Sadly, google gives me close to no results at all, so I have a feeling that I might be quite alone on this project. If anyone have any experience or clue at all, I would be very thankful.
Having faced similar difficulties calling prolog code, albeit in a different situation, I'd recommend checking out the castor c++ library. This allows you to write logic paradigm code in native c++ without needing to extend the language at all. As castor is a header only library it is easy to compile wherever c++ is available.
Castor website: http://www.mpprogramming.com/cpp/default.aspx
Half a year later, I would just like to provide some insight on this. I ended up writing a server with an interface to prolog in Java, accepting prolog calls through TCP. It works almost exactly like the live prolog interpreter SWI-prolog (among others) provides, and mostly works quite well. However, it is far from an optimal solution, as you can't call functions from inside prolog. You lose the possibility of having two-way communication.
If I were to start all over again, I would certainly have tried harder to compile one of the pure C implementations for iOS. I gave it a quick go, but my lack of experience stopped me from even removing all of the errors I got. Judging by the fact that you cannot have prolog running as a background process on a unmodified version of iOS as well, some major rewriting would have to be done. Because of this, one might just have to write a new implementation (perhaps inspired by some of the more lightweight ones out there) from scratch to get the perfect solution.
You can download SWI-Prolog's source code and compile it with XCODE for iOS platform. I've never done that, but it's certainly technically possible.
Once you do that, there are a lot of examples on how to run prolog code from C/C++, hence, you will be able to run prolog from Objective-C.
FYI, you can quite easily bi-directionally make calls between Java and SWI-Prolog if you use JPL:
http://www.swi-prolog.org/packages/jpl/
It is also fully re-entrant, so you can instantiate prolog code from java, which in turn instantiates java code etc...
I did this for a number of commercial projects a few years ago when I was required to connect a Prolog based Reasoning Engine to a lot of Java code.
It does use JNI (the Java Native Interface), so you need to be careful about how you compile and link to the native api. Though if you compile it appropriately for each platform you can make it work cross platform. I had it working on OS-X, Windows, Linux & Solaris.
I do not know if this has been tried but there is the possibility to use the combination of NodeJS for Mobile Apps & TauProlog:
https://code.janeasystems.com/nodejs-mobile
https://github.com/JaneaSystems/nodejs-mobile
and
http://tau-prolog.org/
For an App that is not going to be released on the AppStore I'm looking to embed an interpreter for easy scripting needs. Since I don't really like to get down with pure C, the interpreter should be an Objective C library.
While searching the web I've come across a couple of script interpreters for Objective C but whether those guys work on iPhone is not quite so clear. The one I found that apparently works well on iPhone is LuaCore which brings Lua scripting to iOS Apps.
Which Objective C scripting interpreters have you successfully embedded in iOS Apps?
Some Javascript options:
Using a headless WebKit instance
Instantiate a custom build of JavaScriptCore
CouchBase's attempt at getting SpiderMonkey running (more modern Javascript than V8)
Notice that the JS option will provide with a quite raw runtime environment, you'll probably need to write at least some of it yourself for it to be a convenient development environment.
Other languages:
An attempt with Python.
Clojure by way of a static build of JavaScriptCore (see point 2 above).
The Nu language is also supposed to integrate well, and have a good Objective-C bridge.
I have only tried the first headless WebKit variant for Javascript, but plan to try as many of those listed as possible for a project during the coming months.
Update:
I've used the Javascript method 1 (headless WebKit) a bit longer. I got it running quite effortlessly, and will stick with that for a while. But it has a huge drawback: you can't call back to native in an easy manner. I solved this by writing a PhoneGap inspired bridge that empties a command queue after the script has run.
I've also tried Python using the link I gave. I made it compile and execute some sample code, but it suffers from the same problem as using Js via headless WebKit, and since it consumes quite a bit of memory I skipped it for now. A callback command queue in the same spirit as the one I created with Js would be possible though. Another Python method would be to attempt to call into the Objective C runtime using ctypes. That approach is described in this answer.
Update 2: Here are several new(ish) links for running Scheme, with both interpreter and compilation options.
I just stumbled upon a really decent description by Twitter user #mysterycoconut of how to get Lua support up and running.
Just discovered a post regarding scripting on iOS at answerspice.com.
Based on the post I evaluated Nu and had it up and running pretty quickly based on the Xcode project referenced in this discussion (thanks Tim!). I tested in the simulator and on an iPhone 4. So Nu is definitely among the scripting languages that can be embedded in an iOS App.
So, there are several languages which will allow you to create a website, as long as you configure the server(s) well enough.
To my knowledge, there is:
PHP
ASP.NET
Ruby(on rails, what is
that all about?)
And thusly, my knowledge is limited. Ruby and ASP, I've only heard of, never worked with. If there are other languages, I suppose they have some way to make files containing the needed html. It would then suffice to add a line to the Apache config to associate the file-extension.
And if other languages: are there any notable characteristics about the one(s) you mention?
ANY language can be use to make a dynamic website - you could do it in COBOL or FORTRAN if you were twisted enough. Back in the olden days (about 10 years ago) most dynamic websites were done with CGI scripts - all you needed was a program that could read data from standard input and write data (usually HTML) to standard output.
Most modern languages have libraries and frameworks to make it easier. As well as the languages you have already mentioned, Java, C# and Python are probably the most common in use today.
Typically a web framework will have:
a way of mapping URLs to a class or function to handle the request
a mechanism for extracting data from a request and converting it into an easy to use form
a template system to easily create HTML by filling in the blanks
an easy way to access a database, such as an ORM
mechanisms to handle caching, redirections, errors etc
You can find a comparison of popular web frameworks on wikipedia.
How can you forget Java ? :)
Python
It runs on Windows, Linux/Unix, Mac OS X, and has been ported to the Java and .NET virtual machines.
Python is a perfect scripting language for web applications, e.g. via mod_python for the Apache web server. With Web Server Gateway Interface a standard API has been developed to facilitate these applications. Web application frameworks or application servers like Django, Pylons, TurboGears, web2py and Zope support developers in the design and maintenance of complex applications. Around libraries like NumPy, Scipy and Matplotlib, Python is a standard in scientific computing.
Among the users of Python are YouTube and the original BitTorrent client. Large organizations that make use of Python include Google, Yahoo!, CERN, NASA,and ITA.
This could be for your interest.
Virtually thru CGI all programming languages that produce output may use for web page generation.
Basically, you can use any language (if you are hosting your own server)
Very closely related and very interesting is this article where LISP has been used to build a very succesfull website.
Python has a 3rd party module CherryPy which can be used with or without a http server.
Amongst others: Erlang (YAWS, Mochiweb), Python
JSP has the advantage that it automatically wraps your code in a servlet, compiles that to bytecodes, then uses the just-in-time Java compiler to recompile critical sections into native object code. Not aware of any alternative which allows optimizes your work automatically in this way.
Also allows you to develop and deploy on any combination of Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux.
If you'd like to choose one for the beginning, you should check out PHP first. It gives you the basic clues about how dynamic sites work in general.
After you've become familiar with the basics, I recommend ASP.NET.
Fist off, you should know that ASP.NET is a technology and not a language. (It actually supports any language that can be used on the .NET platform.) Also it is not to be confused with classic ASP. (The old ASP was much more like PHP.)
ASP.NET is very easy to begin with, and after you have some clues about its concepts, you can always dig deeper and customize everything in it. The http://asp.net site is a very good starting point, if you are to learn it. I think it is really worth the effort, because even if you choose not to stick to it, it will give you some interesting ideas and concepts.
I tell you its most important advantages:
The code is compiled (and NOT interpreted like PHP), and it has a very good performance. (In a performace comparsion, it is 10-15 times faster. http://www.misfitgeek.com/pages/Perf_Stat_0809.htm)
It can be run on Windows without effort, and on Linux / Mac / etc using the Mono project.
It implements the Separation of Concerns principle very well.
It has most of the general functionality you'll need built-in. (Such as membership, roles, database management, and so on.)
Every time I see Ruby or Python discussed in the context of web development, it's always with a framework (Rails for Ruby, Django for Python). Are these frameworks necessary? If not, is there a reason why these languages are often used within a framework, while Perl and PHP are not?
I can only speak towards Ruby - but, no, you don't need a framework to run Ruby based pages on the web. You do need a ruby enabled server, such as Apache running eruby/erb. But, once you do, you can create .rhtml files just like RoR, where it processes the inline ruby code.
The short answer is no, they are not necessary. In ruby you have .erb templates that can be used in a similar way as you use PHP pages. You can write a site in ruby or Python using several technologies (Rails-like frameworks, Templates or even talking directly with the HTTP library and building the page CGI-style).
Web frameworks like Python's Django or Ruby's Rails (there are many) just raise the level of abstraction from the PHP's or ASP's, and automate several process (like login, database interaction, REST API's) which is always a good thing.
"Need" is a strong word. You can certainly write Python without one, but I wouldn't want to.
Python wasn't designed (like PHP was, for example) as a direct web scripting language, so common web-ish things like connecting to databases isn't native, and frameworks are handy.
EDIT: mod_python exists for Apache, so if you're merely looking to write some scripts, then Python doesn't need a framework. If you want to build an entire site, I'd recommend using one.
From a Pythonic point of view, you'd absolutely want to use one of the frameworks. Yes, it might be possible to write a web app without them, but it's not going to be pretty. Here's a few things you'll (probably) end up writing from scratch:
Templating: unless you're writing a really really quick hack, you don't want to be generating all of your HTML within your Python code -- this is a really poor design that becomes a maintainability nightmare.
URL Processing: splitting a URL and identifying which code to run isn't a trivial task. Django (for example) provides a fantastic mechanism to map from a set of regular expressions to a set of view functions.
Authentication: rolling your own login/logout/session management code is a pain, especially when there's already pre-written (and tested) code available
Error handling: frameworks already have a good mechanism in place to a) help you debug your app, and b) help redirect to proper 404 and 500 pages.
To add to this, all of the framework libraries are all heavily tested (and fire tested). Additionally, there are communities of people who are developing using the same code base, so if you have any questions, you can probably find help.
In summary, you don't have to, but unless your project is "a new web framework", you're probably better off using one of the existing ones instead.
Framework? Heck, you don't even need a web server if you're using Python, you can make one in around three lines of code.
As to the why:
The most plausible thing I can think of is that Perl and PHP were developed before the notion of using frameworks for web apps became popular. Hence, the "old" way of doing things has stuck around in those cultures. Ruby and Python became popular after frameworks became popular, hence they developed together. If your language has a good framework (or more than one) that's well supported by the community, there's not much reason to try to write a Web App without one.
A framework isn't necessary per se, but it can certainly speed development and help you write "better" code. In PHP, there are definitely frameworks that get used like CakePHP, and in Perl there are many as well like Mason and Catalyst.
The frameworks aren't necessary. However, a lot of developers think frameworks ease development by automating a lot of things. For example, Django will create a production-ready backend for you based on your database structure. It also has lets you incorporate various plugins if you choose. I don't know too much about Rails or Perl frameworks, but PHP frameworks such as Zend, Symfony, Code Igniter, CakePHP, etc are used widely.
Where I work at we rolled our own PHP framework.
Are these frameworks necessary?
No. They, like any 'framework', are simply for speeding up development time and making the programmer's job easier.
If not, is there a reason why these languages are often used within a framework, while Perl and PHP are not?
PHP and Perl were popular languages for building web sites well before the idea of using frameworks was. Frameworks like Rails are what gave Ruby it's following. I'm not sure that Python or Ruby were that common as web languages before they were backed by frameworks.
These days, even PHP/Perl web developement should be backed by a framework (of which there are now many).
By no means are those development frameworks required. But as with most development environments, your productivity will increase exponentially if you have a supported framework to reference and build your applications on. It also decreases the training needed to bring others up to speed on your applications if they already have a core understanding of the framework that you use.
For python, the answer is No you don't have to. You can write python directly behind your web server very easily, take a look at mod_python for how to do it.
A lot of people like frameworks because they supply a lot of the boilerplate code in a reliable form so you don't have to write it yourself. But, like any code project, you should choose the tools and frameworks on their merit for your problem.
You can certainly write CGI scripts in either language and do things "raw".
The frameworks (ideally) save the trouble of writing a pile of code for things that other people have already handled (session handling, etc.).
The decision probably comes down to what you need to do. If the framework has the features you need, why not use it. If the framework is going to require extensive modifications, it might be easier to roll your own stuff. Or check out a different framework.
The python library has numerous modules for doing cgi, parsing html, cookies, WSGI, etc:
http://docs.python.org/library/index.html
PHP has a lot of frameworks. Probably more then most. In Ruby most use Rails so thats what you hear, and Django for Python is mentioned more then not.
But with PHP you have many to choose from.
List of web application frameworks
Any language that can "print" can be used to generate web pages, but frameworks handle a lot of the HTML generation for you. They let you concentrate more on the content and less on the details of coding the raw HTML.