I'm a bit confused by the discussion, so please let me throw in my (perhaps naive view) of the situation and giving you the possibility clearify the situation.
I understand the position of Stefano which mainly is community driven and wants to prevent fragmentation.
But I also found the suggestions of Sylvain and Marc (renaming certain parts) a good one, since they are IMHO very easy to understand by a new user.
So why don't you make a compromise by: * Renaming like Sylvain and Marc suggested (and many agreed) * Keep only one implementations (JavaScript) as the official one * Allow alternative experimental implementations * Let Darwin do the rest ;-)
Perhaps I'm overlooking something (perhaps the FSM stuff, which I'm not particularly interested in ATM), so please give me some guidance. But if not then I don't really understand, why it has to be that difficult.
Anyway, thanks for your effords so far (all of you)!
Bye,
Andreas Hochsteger
http://highstick.blogspot.com/Stephan Michels wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
On Monday, Jul 14, 2003, at 05:32 America/Guayaquil, Stephan Michels wrote:
My point is: absraction in some key areas might prevent discussion (like this one) and might prevent ideas to be exchanged (like the above, which might be totally damn or genial, I don't know [kudos to Chris to pointing me to BPEL4WS, BTW]
All JavaScript Code can be transform into Assembler, or Basic. That's not the point. A programming language should make the implementation of a solution for a given problem as easy as possible.
A scripting language for a flow description is, IMNSHO, the most natural way to describe it (see below why)
I agree with you that writing a Javascript program is a lot easier than writing a state chart, but only if you have a mostly linear combination of pages.
In the direction the people prefer Basic over Assembler, and later Pascal/C over Basic. My problem with the current flow implementation is that is does not make my life easier.
You said you haven't even tried using it.
No, I don't said that. I also try to be open as possible. I tried but the only point I love of the Javascript is the fast development, which were negatived if you must developed Java components.
In my webapp I have a lot transactional stuff, trys/catchs and lookup stuff.
Which are entirely possible with the current flowscript.
So writing these things in Java is natural for me.
All java programmers tend to think at javascript as the "poor man client side shitty version of java". It's not. It only has a very unfortunate name and a very unfortunate history of object model inconsistencies between interpreting environments. But the language is *extremely* well designed and balanced, must more than it appears at first sight.
I understand that you defend Javascript. And it is a really good implementation for the majority. I really don't want to offend some people. The only thing I can say is that I tried, but it is not a solution for me.
If I think of a Flow, which connects pages and combine actions, then the FSM is the first solution, which comes in my mind.
Of course. That's exactly why GOTO was implemented in programming before understanding that you didn't need it.
But now it's a sin to even thinking about having it.
No, it's dangerous like pointer. If you know what you are doing, fine, but in the other case you should abandon them.
But, if history repeats, it will take a few decades to understand that "FSM for the web are to be considered harmful". So I don't expect everybody to buy it right now. I'm patient :-)
Okay, maybe I'm wrong, but maybe not.
But if I understand you correct, you try to prevent different solutions, which try to adopt some ideas of the continuation concept.
It reminds me of those people I meet that say they will not use Cocoon because it doesn't promote official J2EE practices.
Those comments used to piss me off.
:) No, I'm not one of these peoples.
Now I just smile, sitting very relaxed on the side of the river, waiting for their dead bodies to pass by ;-)
Gosh, you must be confident!
The problem with your way is that you maybe find the energy minimum of the system, or maybe you stuck in a local minimum.
Raise your mutation rate ;-)
Stephan.
