World: r3wp
[!REBOL3 Schemes] Implementors guide
older newer | first last |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1650x4] | I thought yahoo had free imap service .. but can't find it now :( |
Nope ... not free. | |
Looks like AIM still has free IMAP ... signing up again! | |
Signed up, sent myself a couple of emails to that account, and then managed to login and download using the imap protocol | |
Pekr 19-Jan-2010 [1654] | Graham - you are becoming a networking Guru :-) |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1655x2] | Nah .. this stuff isn't at all hard. Carl made scheme creation much easier than in r2 |
I suspect that the amount of detail put into making a bullet proof http scheme frightened everyone off! | |
Pekr 19-Jan-2010 [1657x2] | yes, probably ... |
Any thoughts on the unification process of error handling, logging, timeouts, etc.? | |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1659] | Well, Carl is going to have to look at them .. but since my schemes use the same method ... they are pretty unified :) |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1660] | So, where's the best place to start... the one that best shows the basic template? |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1661x2] | smtp I think ... |
though that one is an early effort | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1663x3] | So, not Daytime? |
Graham: During your "journey" through this .. did you notice if there's a standard template that would make sense for various parts of the implementation? | |
Also, where and how would you like to see my comments? | |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1666x3] | I started with daytime, moved to smtp, and then ftp, fax and now imap. I am using pretty much the same template with changes appropriate to the protocol. |
I think docbase ... is the place | |
Daytime is too trivial to learn much from ... maybe FTP instead?? | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1669x2] | Ok. My question above is whether there's a standard "core" that can be used across many protocols... a bit like net-utils or default protocol on R2. |
I'll go with SMTP for now. Looks simple enough. | |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1671x3] | The only standard stuff I use is ... 1. net-log 2. some parse rules and bitsets 3. some authentication stuff like cram-md5 I also stack the commands sent to the port and pop them off as the port is async ... |
I do this in ftp, fax and imap .. but I should go back and do this for smtp as well | |
I was thinking of using net-log as a way to hook into the low level activity of the protocol so that I can patch it as needed when interacting with a GUI ... eg, for progress meters | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1674] | Ok, good... then I'll start with IMAP... since it's more recent. |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1675x2] | One thing that is not clear to me is that if you write to the port eg. write imap-port [ dialect stuff ] and then wait imap-port it can return immediately ... and you don't get anything unless you put in a timeout eg. wait [ imap-port timeout ] |
Ok, let me upload the latest version .... | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1677] | Isn't that dependent on what you return from awake? |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1678x3] | in wrote there is a 'read port .... but i don't get anyting back without the timeout |
uploaded 0.0.3 can login, select a mailbox, get length? and pick | |
It's at the bottom of the page as a file attachment | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1681] | BTW, nice use of Deki wiki. |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1682x2] | It looks pretty but is slower than docbase :) |
and there's no REBOL formatting .. so I use ruby or whatever ... | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1684] | Runs really fast here. Where's the server? |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1685x4] | I think EC2 |
It was a free hosting offer I picked up a couple of years ago ... | |
That is Mindtouch were offering free wikis to people limited to 200Mb I think | |
Of course what I really like about it is that there is a REST based API that I can use with REBOL. | |
Pekr 19-Jan-2010 [1689] | Carl - guys found out, that we have just one shared buffer - why? You have to read everything out during read phase, or you can get corrupted data .... |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1690] | pekr, what protocols are full duplex? |
Pekr 19-Jan-2010 [1691] | none ... but wasn't it you, after all, who just wondered, why the in-out buffer is shared? |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1692x2] | No .. I just pointed it out. |
And wondering if that imposes a lot of GC ... | |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1694x4] | It's one of those things that's in the "balance". |
It turns out, I think you can allocate separate buffers, but you must know how to do it... and I've not tried it yet, so have not mentioned it either. | |
But, I did give full duplex consideration during implementation. I think more modern IM systems benefit from it. | |
Also, it turns out that one must be careful when estimating GC overhead. Sometimes it is more efficient, becuase otherwise you must add extra code to manage memory usage... that is constantly being run. You know what I mean? | |
Graham 19-Jan-2010 [1698] | It wouldn't be a big change to the schemes if that gets implemented right ? |
Carl 19-Jan-2010 [1699] | Right. No change to schemes. |
older newer | first last |