World: r3wp
[!Cheyenne] Discussions about the Cheyenne Web Server
older newer | first last |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8447] | i know, you're just against being the person to do it: :) |
Dockimbel 9-Jul-2010 [8448x2] | well, as I'm not a jvm nor .net fan, I might not be the right person for the job ;-) |
I might try with .net thought, the VM is more dynamic languages friendly than the jvm. | |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8450] | And there is mono |
Dockimbel 9-Jul-2010 [8451x2] | Isn't mono still lagging behind too much? |
in terms of supported features | |
Maxim 9-Jul-2010 [8453] | given the choice, I'd use .net instead of java. the only issue is that it relies tooo much on the IDE, which becomes so sluggish on complex setups that its not funny. |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8454] | and neither run on the iPad ... |
Maxim 9-Jul-2010 [8455x2] | MS IDEs crash regularly in a typical work session... plus every new release, you have to refactor stuff... its just really not nimble. |
anyhow... we are pretty OT ;-) | |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8457] | Is the Da Vinci project still going strong ?? http://openjdk.java.net/projects/mlvm/ |
Dockimbel 9-Jul-2010 [8458x2] | long time I haven't looked at Da Vinci... |
yes it's OT, I'll stop here ;-) | |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8460] | bottom line... only Cheyenne is being maintained |
Dockimbel 9-Jul-2010 [8461x3] | right |
I could do some hotfix to CureCode too if required | |
but no evolution (for now at least) | |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8464] | There was a wish to add a documentation type to curecode |
Dockimbel 9-Jul-2010 [8465] | ah, that could be added easily, I'll try to scan the CC channel here to see look for easy changes this weekend. |
Graham 9-Jul-2010 [8466] | Just to allow users to add examples of how to use functions etc .. since many people do not have access to the various "wiki"s |
Terry 10-Jul-2010 [8467x4] | Doc, the websocket problem discussed earlier seems related to this.. http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28453 |
things work fine as long as i use a domain name, but as soon as I go localhost:81 or 127.0.0.1:81, it goes south. | |
It also seems ok if using default port 80.. | |
hmm, now its working fine everyway.. feel free to completely ignore my previous noise, and I'll just pretend it was all a bad dream | |
Endo 10-Jul-2010 [8471] | is there a ws:// protocol implementation for R2? How do I connect to a server and use websocket without a browser? |
Graham 10-Jul-2010 [8472] | There isn't. |
Endo 10-Jul-2010 [8473] | any plan? or is it difficult do you think? |
Graham 10-Jul-2010 [8474] | http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-socket-protocol/ Doesn't look very difficult .. if you need it, start a bounty for it |
Endo 10-Jul-2010 [8475] | thanks, I'll try. |
Graham 10-Jul-2010 [8476x2] | I had a quick look at the first few pages and it seems to use framing, with only one frame type defined at present. |
Now Ladislav is the master here having written the beer protocol which multiplexes different frames over tcp .. so I'm sure he could do this if there are any difficulties. | |
Endo 10-Jul-2010 [8478] | Thank you. One last question, is the latest binary version of Cheyenne support web sockets? or it is the svn version which supports it? |
Graham 10-Jul-2010 [8479] | Dunno .. never used web sockets ... Doc?? |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [8480] | What uses are people finding for web sockets? |
Endo 11-Jul-2010 [8481] | Do you mean people use it for what? |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [8482x5] | Yes .. |
I presume that a web socket "function" will block all of Cheyenne until it is completed. | |
Unless there's a way of handing off to one of the spare cheyenne processes | |
I presume Terry is using web sockets to communicate to cheyenne instead of using rsp or cgi | |
and cheyenne is an embedded web server | |
Endo 11-Jul-2010 [8487x4] | well, I'm planning to make an turn based online game, but not inside a browser, client will be a separate rebol application. it will be connected to a web socket, and player did somthing it will be sent to all other players |
I can use cgi aswell but there is no way to detect if a player disconnected. | |
But yes it blocks the whole Cheyenne process so it should be a very small and fast function. | |
Btw, I guess the latest svn version of Cheyenne supports web sockets as in changelog.txt which is 0.9.20. The latest binary version on web site does not, V0.9.19. | |
Kaj 11-Jul-2010 [8491] | How do you know it blocks? Doc explained it doesn't |
Endo 11-Jul-2010 [8492] | it says in Cheyenne documents? |
Graham 11-Jul-2010 [8493x3] | the docs say it blocks |
See http://code.google.com/p/cheyenne-server/source/browse/trunk/Cheyenne/www/ws-apps/ws-test-app.r | |
As this is running in main process, when ;-- any handler runs, it will block the server, so, you have to keep your code ;-- very efficient, it should run in between 1ms and 10ms if you want your Cheyenne ;-- server be able to scale to hundreds of concurrent clients. That's the cost to ;-- pay for not having multi-threading...Anyway, you can use the 'do-task function ;-- to run longer code without blocking. | |
Dockimbel 11-Jul-2010 [8496] | Websocket server code can be run from two places: either in Cheyenne main process (allows accessing all clients ports and detecting ports open/close events) or in RSP scripts (using 'do-task function from a websocket app) when the job takes too much time (like accessing a database). |
older newer | first last |