Maybe it's just be, but maybe it's something else. Has anyone besides
Marco something implemented with it? Would you mind to share you
experiences?
Regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Good day,
> Maybe it's just be, but maybe it's something else. Has anyone besides
> Marco something implemented with it? Would you mind to share you
> experiences?
Yes, I'm writing "port" of FreeSide (http://www.sisd.com/freeside/)
with it.
Some parts are already in use for three months as our intranet
application.
With 2K of macroses I can create complete UCW CRUD application with
tabular, edit and search views, foreign key navigation in few lines of
code
directly from database:
;; generate CLSQL classes and methods from database connection
(gen-view-class aaa-session (freeside-db-object)
()
((:metaclass freeside-db-class)))
(gen-set-view-defaults-from-db aaa-session)
;; generate UCW classes from CLSQL classes
(define-form-from-view (fs.aaa-session aaa-session) ()
;; specialize type of status slot
((status :ie-type (ucw::selector
:indirect-value 'status
:options '((1 . "start")
(2 . "stop")
(3 . "accounting-off")
(4 . "hung"))
:test #'eql
:key #'car
:output-format (deflambda (v _) (_ (cdr v))))))
(:default-initargs
:data-src *freeside-src*
:readonly-slots '(user-id acct-session-id acct-session-time)))
(define-set-from-view (fs.aaa-session-set aaa-session)
()
(:default-initargs
:slots-order
'(user-id calling-station-id from-timestamp
nas-ip-address called-station-id)
:data `(:data-class aaa-session
:data-src ,*radius-src*
:fetch-order (([nas-ip-address] :asc)
([from-timestamp] :desc)
([user-id] :asc)))))
I second this request.
ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
documentation for it.
Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
covers very basic things.
Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
documentation at all.
UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
video).
Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project and
start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
I agree, UCW does need tutorials and documentation. I've been vandering
examples/ and doc/ for hours and just could not came up with how one's
suppose to use templates... But maybe it's just me. ;-)
I think another UCW video is not such a bad idea - it would show more
in less time.
Vagif Verdi wrote:
> I second this request.
> ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
> documentation for it.
> Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
> covers very basic things.
> Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
> documentation at all.
> UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
> video).
>
> Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project and
> start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
>
Why don't you write the documentation? Or at least some documentation,
it does not have to be the official documentation. You can make a web
site out of it, using UCW. Learn UCW by asking questions and by staring
at the code and examples. Ask the developers and ask other users. As you
learn, write it down, in HTML. You should include your email address so
people can ask questions about things you left out. You can turn that
into an FAQ.
No fun? Too much work? No reward to you? I understand.
:)
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"And I will know my song well before I start singing." - Bob Dylan
Ken Tilton wrote:
> Vagif Verdi wrote:
>
>> I second this request.
>> ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
>> documentation for it.
>> Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
>> covers very basic things.
>> Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
>> documentation at all.
>> UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
>> video).
>>
>> Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project and
>> start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
>>
>
> Why don't you write the documentation? Or at least some documentation,
> it does not have to be the official documentation. You can make a web
> site out of it, using UCW. Learn UCW by asking questions and by staring
> at the code and examples. Ask the developers and ask other users. As you
> learn, write it down, in HTML.
I left something out. You should take pains to structure things
effectively. Examples for everything, and a series of sample
applications of gradually increasing complexity. Invite others to read
it and tell you what things that could be made clearer. An index and
table of contents are indispensible. Lots of diagrams, and format the
code nicely.
btw, a couple of Cells users have threatened to do just that. Funny how
no one has yet. :)
> No fun? Too much work? No reward to you? I understand.
>
> :)
I still understand, and I am still laughing.
kt
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"And I will know my song well before I start singing." - Bob Dylan
Ken Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
> Vagif Verdi wrote:
>> I second this request.
>> ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
>> documentation for it.
>> Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
>> covers very basic things.
>> Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
>> documentation at all.
>> UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
>> video).
>> Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project
>> and
>> start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
>>
>
> Why don't you write the documentation? Or at least some documentation,
> it does not have to be the official documentation. You can make a web
> site out of it, using UCW. Learn UCW by asking questions and by
> staring at the code and examples. Ask the developers and ask other
> users. As you learn, write it down, in HTML. You should include your
> email address so people can ask questions about things you left
> out. You can turn that into an FAQ.
>
> No fun? Too much work? No reward to you? I understand.
Well I'm not sure about that, but I have tried to understand ucw half
a year or so ago for more then two months. I asked a lot of questions
and did get good answers. But I did not get it. I started using
Webactions, which were and are at least to me much easier to
understand. Now after another half year I got back to UCW and "now I
understand" a bit more, there are however quite few "black" areas for
me that is the interaction of the templates and actual code.
I get bashed for telling someone using ucw that it's
incomprehensableto get anywhere whith it's stuff, the remark from him
was that UCW is "well-documented"...
This is however not the first experience I had that way. E.g I gave
cl-xml tries over and over again, the answer I got were well "answers"
I asked other Lispers about it and guess what they did not use it
because the did not understand it.
I have looked into you cells stuff also, and I tried to get cells-gtk
installed and running without not getting really into it. Although I
would think it would be a good thing to connect the M - V part of MVC
with it
I have checked more than one package in the mean time and I can tell
that for me the following holds. Some libraries seem to be there to be
used alone to the sake of the original implementor and others are
written for others to be used also. Now here is my list of packages I
found extremly difficult to learn (yet understand)
- CL-HTTP
- cl-xml
- ucw
- clim (be it the clim from the vendors or mcclim)
- cells
- lisp-on-line(s)?
- bknr
here a list I could simply understand and use
- aserve
- cl-ppcre
- cl-split-sequence
- cl-sql
- webactions
- CAPI
- ltk
- htmlgen
- lml2
this are middle grounds
- kpax
I for my part can just tell that the quality of the available lisp
packages in regard to learning it vary way more then in any other
language I use regularly, and it was often much more work to get them
running, YMMV of course
Regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> Ken Tilton <·········@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>>Vagif Verdi wrote:
>>
>>>I second this request.
>>>ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
>>>documentation for it.
>>>Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
>>>covers very basic things.
>>>Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
>>>documentation at all.
>>>UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
>>>video).
>>>Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project
>>>and
>>>start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
>>>
>>
>>Why don't you write the documentation? Or at least some documentation,
>>it does not have to be the official documentation. You can make a web
>>site out of it, using UCW. Learn UCW by asking questions and by
>>staring at the code and examples. Ask the developers and ask other
>>users. As you learn, write it down, in HTML. You should include your
>>email address so people can ask questions about things you left
>>out. You can turn that into an FAQ.
>>
>>No fun? Too much work? No reward to you? I understand.
>
> Well I'm not sure about that, but I have tried to understand ucw half
> a year or so ago for more then two months. I asked a lot of questions
> and did get good answers. But I did not get it. I started using
> Webactions, which were and are at least to me much easier to
> understand. Now after another half year I got back to UCW and "now I
> understand" a bit more, there are however quite few "black" areas for
> me that is the interaction of the templates and actual code.
>
> I get bashed for telling someone using ucw that it's
> incomprehensableto get anywhere whith it's stuff, the remark from him
> was that UCW is "well-documented"...
OK, that is different. I had seen recommendations here of UCW and
assumed (mistake) it was great. Not that it is not, but reading your
remarks reminded me that people also recommend McCLIM and CLIM in
general. :)
>
> This is however not the first experience I had that way. E.g I gave
> cl-xml tries over and over again, the answer I got were well "answers"
> I asked other Lispers about it and guess what they did not use it
> because the did not understand it.
>
> I have looked into you cells stuff also, and I tried to get cells-gtk
> installed and running without not getting really into it. Although I
> would think it would be a good thing to connect the M - V part of MVC
> with it
>
> I have checked more than one package in the mean time and I can tell
> that for me the following holds. Some libraries seem to be there to be
> used alone to the sake of the original implementor and others are
> written for others to be used also. Now here is my list of packages I
> found extremly difficult to learn (yet understand)
>
> - CL-HTTP
> - cl-xml
> - ucw
> - clim (be it the clim from the vendors or mcclim)
> - cells
> - lisp-on-line(s)?
> - bknr
>
> here a list I could simply understand and use
> - aserve
> - cl-ppcre
> - cl-split-sequence
> - cl-sql
> - webactions
> - CAPI
> - ltk
> - htmlgen
> - lml2
>
> this are middle grounds
> - kpax
>
> I for my part can just tell that the quality of the available lisp
> packages in regard to learning it vary way more then in any other
> language I use regularly, and it was often much more work to get them
> running, YMMV of course
I think you are right about the current state of CL libraries. If UCW
sucks like CLIM, it is not a documentation issue. But I have no way of
knowing until I lock horns with Web application development. At which
time I will probably just roll my own. :)
ken
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"And I will know my song well before I start singing." - Bob Dylan
Well as usual Ken has some good points. So I started with somethin on
cliki, I would invite those interested to come along and check how
someone has tried to get into Web application development.
I would like to invite also some of you to show how you did it with
your prefferedd tools. The thing I've choosen to introduce is the
following "example"
The example I want to use to introduce you to ucw is the following
1. a user comes to our site and wants to download some software
2. we are curious about him and want to learn his name and also how often he has come to download stuff from our pages
3. after he has let us know his name we redirect him to the download locations
4. it should not be possible for him/her to reach the pages without
giving us some name (even if it's garbage)
I've planned now for some time to compare the different approaches,
and as written in another mail I spend quite a few months on the
diverse tools, some were easy to use and some were of no use to
me.
What I'd like you to do is using some database backed stuff. So I
would like to see how you have put it to use. I'm planning (well maybe
better hoping) that I (or you?) will change requirements over the time.
In my opinion one of the real major
strengths of Common Lisp is the "growing" of software. You start with
something totally simple, get it working. Then you start the next round
add things and during that you rewrite quite a bunch of stuff. So it
would be nice if you find the time also to introduce your tools and
"working style"
The URL you might like to check out are:
http://www.cliki.net/Web%20Application%20Development%20Comparison
and if you are interested especially in a ucw-tutorial (for now)
http://www.cliki.net/ucw%20Tutorial
Regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Friedrich Dominicus <···················@q-software-solutions.de> wrote:
+---------------
| The example I want to use to introduce you to ucw is the following
| 1. a user comes to our site and wants to download some software
| 2. we are curious about him and want to learn his name ...
+---------------
I don't know about other peoples' reactions, but that's the point
at which I go away and look for a different site to browse.
Another absolute turnoff to me is a site which requires JavaScript
to be enabled to do even basic browsing. Ditto SW/Flash.
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
····@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
> Friedrich Dominicus <···················@q-software-solutions.de> wrote:
> +---------------
> | The example I want to use to introduce you to ucw is the following
> | 1. a user comes to our site and wants to download some software
> | 2. we are curious about him and want to learn his name ...
> +---------------
>
> I don't know about other peoples' reactions, but that's the point
> at which I go away and look for a different site to browse.
Well it's your decision, but I think it's a nice example and BTW I can
tell you that hundreds every day to not bother. I fill in some default
value and they either accept it or the tell me their name, and it's
fully unintrisive. If you are turned back by that, so be it.
>
> Another absolute turnoff to me is a site which requires JavaScript
> to be enabled to do even basic browsing. Ditto SW/Flash.
I understand but it has nothing to to with JavaScript
Regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:03:35 -0800, Vagif Verdi wrote:
> I second this request.
> ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
> documentation for it.
> Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
> covers very basic things.
> Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
> documentation at all.
> UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
> video).
>
> Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project and
> start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
And how much are _you_ willing to pay for these services?
I'm pretty sure 'the crew' would be able to find someone competent
to do the work once financing is secured.
Cheers, Ralf Mattes
I would love to put tutorial and documentation ... if I would KNOW UCW
But I do not. I'm not a ucw user, although i wanted. I spend a few days
installing ucw and it's dependencies on acl, i even post a patch on
fixing startup errors for ucw on acl.
But i could not proceed any further. Simply because i need a work to
do, not an investigation.
I just quit ucw and took portable aserve with WebActions. It HAS a
documentation.
And I'm using it now for production.
As fas as how much i'm willing to pay - ask people who created
excellent documentation for python, ruby, RoR.
How much did they get paid ? Oh just a recognition and wide popularity
of their beloved languages and frameworks
No money? Too much work? Not a recognizable reward for you? I
understand.
Vagif Verdi wrote:
> I would love to put tutorial and documentation ... if I would KNOW UCW
> But I do not. I'm not a ucw user, although i wanted. I spend a few days
> installing ucw and it's dependencies on acl, i even post a patch on
> fixing startup errors for ucw on acl.
>
> But i could not proceed any further. Simply because i need a work to
> do, not an investigation.
> I just quit ucw and took portable aserve with WebActions. It HAS a
> documentation.
> And I'm using it now for production.
That's great, glad you found something that worked for you.
>
> As fas as how much i'm willing to pay - ask people who created
> excellent documentation for python, ruby, RoR.
> How much did they get paid ? Oh just a recognition and wide popularity
> of their beloved languages and frameworks
I see my point cleared your head with room to spare. /You/ could learn
UCW the hard way and be the "people who created excellent
documentation". I mean, who do you think those people are, the authors?
Sometimes, for authors who like writing doc. But when you find a good
author who hates writing doc, that is the opportunity to contribute to
open source, especially for noobs to a language who might have a hard
time contributing code.
Of course in your case you found an easier path and did the right thing,
you took it. But if anyone else out there likes writing doc, the open
source fairy is recruiting.
ken
--
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/
"And I will know my song well before I start singing." - Bob Dylan
>>>I mean, who do you think those people are, the authors?
Of course !
Look at fate of any opensource library of web framework.
Those authors who put great deal of effort into documenting their work
and making it easily accesible to newcomers, enjoy rapid growth of
userbase, popularity and adoption.
Those who just write the code vanish in sourceforge graveyard.
Open Source Fairy is not going to come to you unless you entice her..
And do not think that my case is single example.
What happened to me (try ucw, and abandon it for another framework) is
typical scenario.
"R. Mattes" <····@hobbes.mh-freiburg.de> writes:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:03:35 -0800, Vagif Verdi wrote:
>
>> I second this request.
>> ucw became very complex system, yet there's practically no
>> documentation for it.
>> Viedo does not count as documentation, first it is obsolette, second it
>> covers very basic things.
>> Lot's of components (login component etc) are not mentioned in
>> documentation at all.
>> UCW desperately needs good documentation and good tutorials (please no
>> video).
>>
>> Maybe it is time ucw crew stop adding new features, freeze project and
>> start putting documentation and new good looking web site.
>
> And how much are _you_ willing to pay for these services?
> I'm pretty sure 'the crew' would be able to find someone competent
> to do the work once financing is secured.
Let's setup a bounty!
http://www.gnome.org/bounties/
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
"This statement is false." In Lisp: (defun Q () (eq nil (Q)))