From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: new module: (web uri) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:41:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <559494.66997.qm@web37901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1287513536 26120 80.91.229.12 (19 Oct 2010 18:38:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:38:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: Mike Gran Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 19 20:38:55 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P8H5K-0002TK-Ch for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:38:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33773 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P8H5J-0004ia-FZ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:38:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41963 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P8H4B-0003qb-E4 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8H4A-0004Pa-Ai for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:43 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:50296 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8H4A-0004PV-7X for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:42 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8744BE0475; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:41 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=27RBTTVJu/Mz7WCJMuCvBT0HwlI=; b=TCX3c1 Dg+T4dnutDAvl07oaeohxlw1fHT1f0D6bOnwYamRbCKwNCmDWFO2gPHiAseVL3LS RusAaJ2GaWbmkQ6jWYumpwSQXpfyuokI4L0Cqhf661RDEmIucT1O8dgiy1w5qo5G p5tXqv6TE253VhLr4iXE1DpPgRZGLELtriAlg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wZzmaJhaORzio14E+1/oBHUKlAIWzL+B Cu5/njb0/jnCCDpeBkHC1NmALabt0P9uSWaSgtBMCxZWaz/qR/TZxipJBmQRkBrA wwtowxE1mo7iJxAdksy5fknAidjD7wdhv6WBaCDIuDYotUQJBW4efeA/sxVpF3Wq RGCdNcT54SY= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75007E0474; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:40 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [79.151.127.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AC878E0470; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:37:38 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <559494.66997.qm@web37901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (Mike Gran's message of "Sun, 17 Oct 2010 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F40ABBCE-DBAF-11DF-8CFC-030CEE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:11058 Archived-At: Heya Mike, On Sun 17 Oct 2010 22:05, Mike Gran writes: > Writing yet another webserver for fun is one thing, but, writing yet > another webserver for inclusion in Guile is the path of madness, because > you'd be implying that it is, in some sense, validated. A webserver > is oh so deceptively simple... But looking at the http11 parser > in Mongrel2, for example, shows how it is harder than it looks. Yeah I certainly don't want to bless a web server, or even write a proper one. It would be nice though if we had a *toy* web server. For example, as I mentioned I was setting up my web app, and I just wanted to see if it worked. If I could run a toy server and check that it worked, that would be great. Then I could choose mongrel2 or nginx or whatever with fastcgi or mod_proxy or whatever, and I have some freedom in that respect, because I know that somewhere there is a (lambda (request) ...) that doesn't care much about how the actual web server is implemented. You could be right though, this might be a bad idea. But at the very least we do need an HTTP client in Guile if we are ever to make an ELPA-alike (or cpan-alike, if you prefer), and for that we need a URI lib, an http client, perhaps request and response object, base64 and mime encoding, etc. > BTW, I haven't tried it yet, but, a Guile / Mongrel2 could make for > a great platform, with not too much glue code. Yeah that sounds like fun! Microhttpd also sounds interesting for toy usage, will check it out. Peace, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/