On 04/06/2015 10:11 AM, mozert1 mozert1 wrote:
1. For such ur/web programming, the best is to start with the actual
profitable thing, so I went over the demos at
www.impredicative.com/ur/demo/
And listEdit.ur is a bit too folded , And chat.ur is also somewhat
folded. I am attaching the diff files of the revision to this mail. Or
may be I don't get the sense of things yet.
I don't understand what you mean by "folded," so I can't comment more.
2. Nomenclature thing: could the [signal] monad be renamed to
[permaction] ((dynamic) permanent action), so to parallel the
[transaction] (transient action) monad. and the [signal] operation of
the [signal] monad be renamed to [dynget] (dynamic get). and maybe
push all the way and replace [<dyn source=] by [<dyn permaction=] or
[<dyn connectfrom=] or [<dynpermaction connectfrom=] and replace
[<ctextbox signal=] by [<ctextbox connectto=] ...
"Signal" is established terminology from functional-reactive
programming, so I think it remains a good name for this monad. I
haven't seen "permaction" before.
3. Precisely why inria ocsigen is never ever mentioned on the website ?
There's no claim of completeness for comparison with other frameworks,
on the Ur/Web site, I think; so that's the reason! Ocsigen is definitely
mentioned in the research paper on the design of Ur/Web.
or even on the TechEmpower comparison ?
This one is even easier to answer: because no one contributed an Ocsigen
implementation of the benchmarks yet. :) Anyone is free to do so on GitHub.
_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
