>
> Rails uses a DSL for mapping routes to controllers,actions, and
> params, so you can concisely make clean and hackable urls like /posts/
> 2007/12/02, /posts/tag/holiday, and REST resources. The basic idea is
> to provide more structure, so that everyone does not have to implement
> their own custom route system.
I think that with the ErlyWeb app controller this is even easier, no?
hook(A) ->
NewAppmoddata =
case yaws_arg:appmoddata(A) of
"/posts/foo" -> "/posts/bar";
"/posts/bar" -> "/posts/foo";
Other -> "blah/" ++ Other
end,
{ewc, yaws_arg:appmoddata(A, NewAppmoddata)}.
>
>
> >
> > > * Standardized script interface (for migrations, generators/templates,
> > > tests, maintenance tasks )
> >
> > I'm open to suggestions here.
> >
> >
>
> Currently, erlyweb uses erlang for scripting tasks like generators
> etc, but maybe doing the scripting with a scripting language would be
> a better fit.
I'm not so keen on introducing another dependency. Plus, it kind of
hurts my head to frequently switch between Erlang and a scripting
language. I don't think there would be a big advantage (if any) to be
gained from using a scripting language -- and we should be eating our
own dogfood, no? :)
>
> Plugins do not migrate or modify the schema directly. Plugins often
> provide generators that the developer uses to generate migration
> files. The developer then does a "rake db:migrate" to actually apply
> any new migrations.
>
> Components are vertical slices of functionality. Plugins should also
> add horizontal slices of functionality, but that is harder to
> accomplish with a compiled language. I think Smerl could be used to
> cleverly add horizontal functionality via plugins, but they key is
> having a standard ized way for smerl to mixin behavior into existing
> modules.
That would certainly be possible -- even fun. In face, that's exactly
what the erlyweb_magic feature does. But what are other possible use
cases for it? Can you give us examples where horizontal slices of
functionality (that can't be done with erlyweb_magic) would be useful?
>
> Maybe plugins are a chicken and egg problem...the reason no body
> creates libs for erlyweb is because there is no standard way to share
> such libs. Perhaps a standard plugin structure would encourage folks
> to share their libs, and lead to a proliferation of contribution.
You can email them to the list :)
This problem can be solved like this: once people create 2 or more
addons that make sense as plugins as opposed to core framework
features, we will create a plugin system.
>
> Rails gradually got bigger and bigger up to version 1.2.x, and the
> soon to be released Rails 2.0 does not add much new functionality,
> instead it pulled all the non-vital stuff out to plugins. Therefore,
> the core can remain small, and features can be added with plugins.
This sounds like a good approach.
Thanks,
Yariv
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"erlyweb" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/erlyweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
