> -----Original Message----- > From: AOLserver Discussion > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Jackson > Sent: 09 February 2005 00:55 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver facelift. > > Dossy quoted Tom: > > > > 6. Split the discussion between C level source code and > applications. > > > > > > There's few enough AOLserver developers who deal at the C > code level > > > that having a separate mailing list.... > In reply, > On Tuesday 08 February 2005 14:01, Tim Moss wrote: > > I too don't think splitting the list would help at this stage - you > > might end up with an us and them elite vs. newbies split > which never helps. > > > Amazing when you take a single sentence, and forget the > following two paragraphs labled A & B. I was speaking of the > website, not the mailing list.
Sorry Tom - I misunderstood - I wrote my reply at about 2 in the morning - never a good idea so here we go again! :-) Having developed in C and Tcl for many years, and having come across AOLserver and having fallen in love with it relatively late in life, but finding aspects very frustrating I hoped my perspective on the discussion about how to make the AOLserver project more appealing would be of value. In short my view is the more standardised Tcl code there is available that provides basic blocks for building applications, in particular web applications, the more people will use AOLserver. I'm capable of writing C modules for AOLserver, but chances are they wont be very portable, unlikely to be thread safe and quite honestly probably wouldn't perform much better than a Tcl version - largely because my C is rusty so I've lost a lot of that kind of expertise. In my experience it would only be maintainable/usable by a relatively small audience. Were I to write a Tcl module chances are it would be finished faster, pretty portable, would be thread safe and would probably perform well. I believe it would be usable/maintainable by a wider audience, and modifying it is just a matter of changing a textfile and testing rather than getting into the complications of compiling/linking etc. - If better performance was required then a C version would be easily deduced from the Tcl code - the reverse would be less easy. I find it a shame that this discussion (which has drawn out more people and interesting ideas on the list than I knew existed) has degenerated in places to personal insults and pedantism over very fine details - so often the way amongst groups of tecchies though; perhaps its inevitable. > I've mentioned in an email earlier today that I have compiled > a complete (or 99% complete) list of config parameters, for > the modules I have had time to work on. The example also > makes it easy for module maintainers to add a single file > which documents all the parameters used. > <http://rmadilo.com/m2/config.tgz> contains just the config files. > If for no other reason than documentation purposes, all > config parameters should appear in the config files, so you > can get the values after startup. If it is of any use to anyone (it worked around about 4.03 4.04 I think) here's my sample config file with all of the server config values in it and some of the common modules: http://www.site-speed.com/aolserver/sample_nsd.tcl -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
