I'm confused about picking the right web framework for lisp, the
alternatives are many but I can't make up my mind based on what I have
read:
1. UCW - is based on continuations with steep learning curve so it
looks that is masters only.
2. cl-weblocks - GPL
3. KPAX - depends on cl-http which has a weird license and I'm not
sure how many people are using it.
It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
meantime what do you suggest ?
On Jul 6, 9:40 am, ····················@gmail.com wrote:
> 3. KPAX - depends on cl-http which has a weird license and I'm not
> sure how many people are using it.
>
> It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
> framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
> meantime what do you suggest ?
KPAX is _not_ based on cl-http afaik.
"A web application framework written in pure Common Lisp. Can run
standalone, behind Apache/mod_lisp, or with portableaserve."
I'd recommend you use hunchentoot and make your own framework as you
write your application.
Hunchentoot is small with excellent documentation and you will learn
more about web programming with lisp that way.
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 08:40:30 -0000, ····················@gmail.com tried to
confuse everyone with this message:
>I'm confused about picking the right web framework for lisp, the
>alternatives are many but I can't make up my mind based on what I have
>read:
>1. UCW - is based on continuations with steep learning curve so it
>looks that is masters only.
>2. cl-weblocks - GPL
>3. KPAX - depends on cl-http which has a weird license and I'm not
>sure how many people are using it.
>
>It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
>framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
>meantime what do you suggest ?
Again, who cares if the license is viral or not, if you only have the app
running on your server and not distribute it, it doesn't matter.
--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
····················@gmail.com writes:
> I'm confused about picking the right web framework for lisp, the
> alternatives are many but I can't make up my mind based on what I have
> read:
> 1. UCW - is based on continuations with steep learning curve so it
> looks that is masters only.
> 2. cl-weblocks - GPL
> 3. KPAX - depends on cl-http which has a weird license and I'm not
> sure how many people are using it.
>
> It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
> framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
> meantime what do you suggest ?
Well, if you have some budget we could start discussing this kind of
development.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
NOTE: The most fundamental particles in this product are held
together by a "gluing" force about which little is currently known
and whose adhesive power can therefore not be permanently
guaranteed.
····················@gmail.com wrote:
> It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
> framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
> meantime what do you suggest ?
Ruby.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
The OCaml Journal
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_journal/?usenet
Dnia 06.07.2007 Jon Harrop <···@ffconsultancy.com> napisa�/a:
> ····················@gmail.com wrote:
>> It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
>> framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
>> meantime what do you suggest ?
>
> Ruby.
NOTE NOTE NOTE: our troll wannabe didn't suggest OCaml-based
Ocsigen! ;)
--
Daniel 'Nathell' Janus, GG #1631668, ············@nathell.korpus.pl
create_initial_thread(initial_function);
lose("CATS. CATS ARE NICE.\n");
-- Steel Bank Common Lisp, sbcl/runtime/runtime.c:425
http://weitz.de/hunchentoot/
Pros:
1. Very simple. Fast learning curve.
2. Excellent documentation
3. Runs on windows (lispworks) and linux (lispworks, sbcl)
On 7 Lip, 02:02, Vagif Verdi <···········@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://weitz.de/hunchentoot/
>
> Pros:
> 1. Very simple. Fast learning curve.
> 2. Excellent documentation
> 3. Runs on windows (lispworks) and linux (lispworks, sbcl)
And cons?
--
Cheers,
Rafal Strzalinski
http://nablaone.net
On Jul 7, 6:56 pm, Rafal Strzalinski <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 Lip, 02:02, Vagif Verdi <···········@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://weitz.de/hunchentoot/
>
> > Pros:
> > 1. Very simple. Fast learning curve.
> > 2. Excellent documentation
> > 3. Runs on windows (lispworks) and linux (lispworks, sbcl)
It runs on Allegro, cmucl & openmcl too & it's very fast.
>
> And cons?
Not a real framework, no widgets like grid, survey.. You can of course
roll your own but you need to write a rather complex macros, so I
guess lisp is still not ready for web for newbies. I'll check on
erlyweb.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Rafal Strzalinskihttp://nablaone.net
On 2007-07-09, <····················@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >http://weitz.de/hunchentoot/
>> And cons?
> Not a real framework
It is a web server. That is not a disadvantage.
> , no widgets like grid, survey.. You can of course
You mentioned cl-weblocks yourself.
It provides widgets and looks like it is, in fact, implemented on top of
Hunchentoot. How does that disqualify Hunchentoot?
> roll your own but you need to write a rather complex macros, so I
> guess lisp is still not ready for web for newbies. I'll check on
> erlyweb.
Even assuming that server-side HTML generation is in any way
interesting (client-side XSLT processing with the server sending only
text files and XML is my preferred approach) there have been enough
good suggestions in this thread alone.
On Jul 6, 3:40 am, ····················@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm confused about picking the right web framework for lisp, the
> alternatives are many but I can't make up my mind based on what I have
> read:
> 1. UCW - is based on continuations with steep learning curve so it
> looks that is masters only.
> 2. cl-weblocks - GPL
> 3. KPAX - depends on cl-http which has a weird license and I'm not
> sure how many people are using it.
>
> It would be great if someone with more experience than me to make web
> framework based on hunchentoot with non-viral license . In the
> meantime what do you suggest ?
KPAX.
UCW is really cool, but not really documented very well. cl-weblocks
is cool, but not ready for everyday use. Knowing the Lisp world, most
people will tell you to roll your own. This might be good for you,
but I am lazy and there are a few nice lisp web frameworks out there.
····················@gmail.com writes:
Personally I like Webactions.
Petter
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?