Thanks for sharing the presentation. Nice insights and a reminder of the 'full-stack' functionality available in picolisp. I've mostly utilized it on the 'server-side'.
I would be very interested to hear more detail around how you built out the gui. /Lindsay On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 1:27 AM Mattias Sundblad <matt...@inogu.se> wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > > I also really enjoyed the presentation. Thank you for sharing! > > Thank you very much! > > > I'd be interested in hearing more about the django vs picolisp > development > > experience. > > My experience is that Django requires more work to set up. There are more > things > to handle and you work more with the framework and less with the actual > problem, > in my view. > > Django is ok as far as traditional frameworks go, and it does provide > quite a > lot of functionality out of the box. As long as you stay within those > boundaries, you can get a lot done in a short time. However, once you need > to > step outside this box things get complicated. Most projects tend to reach > for > third party components in these cases, and end up with a very large > application > containing even larger parts which you do not have very much control over. > > We have many examples of web applications at work that are now composed of > obsolete components, framework versions, etc. I am responsible for > creating some > of them. While it was possible for our small team to build them quickly in > the > first place, we have sadly been unable to maintain them, and it is now in a > state where a re-write is probably the best way forward. In a way, the > framework > has made it possible for us to outrun ourselves, our capabilites. It has > moved > us to a place where we are no longer in control. In contrast, Picolisp > seems to > let you go as far forward as you are ready to handle at any given point in > time. > > I have not used Flask much, but it seems to be a bit more minimalist > compared to > Django? > > Another point worth mentioning is the differences in learning experiences. > While > using Django, I mostly learned Django and not that much else. I became a > developer who could only work within those confines. Picolisp on the other > hand, > was harder to get started with, but working with Pil has made me a much > better > programmer. It constantly challenges me in a good way and makes me learn > things. > The demo app provided with the distribution has been an invaluable help in > getting started, together with Regenaxer and this community as a whole of > course! > > This is my experience and my take on the matter. Naturally, it could of > course > be because I was an extraordinarily poor Django developer. However, I was > still > able to create several systems using the technology. > > Picolisp gives you ownership of the applications in a much better way, I > think. > You write the code you need and you own it afterwards, being able to > change it, > re-write it or even delete it, depending on the needs of your clients and > users. > It removes that sinking feeling I get when thinking about updating the old, > outdated, applications written in "traditional" technologies. ;) > > > > love to hear how picolisp compared. Did you use the stock picolisp gui > > library? > > The first version did use the stock Picolisp gui, but the current version > has a > different look. This was mostly achieved through the use of a custom CSS, > only > very small changes were made to the Lisp code itself. Would this be an > interesting subject to write a tutorial around? > > Best regards, > > Mattias > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe >
