[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ruby-core
Subject:    Re: Ruby M17N meeting summary
From:       Ezra Zygmuntowicz <ezmobius () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-02-22 20:33:21
Message-ID: 3162953D-D909-4D09-9949-AA734752F05D () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On Feb 22, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Trans wrote:

>
>
> On Feb 20, 4:37 pm, "Jeremy Kemper" <jer...@bitsweat.net> wrote:
>> On Feb 20, 2008 11:35 AM, Ezra Zygmuntowicz <ezmob...@gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 18, 2008, at 2:33 AM, Martin Duerst wrote:
>>
>>>> == Looking for a successor for cgi.rb
>>>> Conditions are as follows:
>>>> * different name than cgi.rb
>>>> * using MVC separation
>>
>>>        May I suggest we use a stripped down version of rack for  
>>> the cgi.rb
>>> replacement?http://rack.rubyforge.org/
>>
>>>        I am using this as the basis for my merb web framework. I  
>>> know that
>>> rails is thinking of switching to use it also. Many of the other  
>>> newer
>>> ruby web platforms re using it as well. We plan to use rack as the
>>> interface to rubyland in mod_rubinius.
>>
>>>        I think this would make a very suitable replacement for  
>>> cgi.rb. I
>>> would be happy to volunteer to spearhead the work on getting this  
>>> into
>>> the stdlib.
>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Seconded, though I wish Rack would use a more Rubyish API than
>> big-hash-in/conventional-array-out.
>
> I think it's only a good idea if API is much improved. I've use Rack
> too and it works well, but the API is rather painful.
>
> T.

	Agreed, I have some ideas for a better api that I am implementing in  
merb and will post for you guys to review. The current rack interface  
makes streaming responses a bit tough but I think I have a good  
workaround that should make the api less painful.

Cheers-

- Ezra Zygmuntowicz
-- Founder & Software Architect
-- ezra@engineyard.com
-- EngineYard.com


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]