dumb question?

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by PJ6, Sep 15, 2005.

  1. PJ6

    PJ6 Guest

    Are there any plans for broswers to support a real language client-side, and
    not just "cripple script"? Will we ever have the luxury of programming using
    Framework classes client-side some day?

    Paul
     
    PJ6, Sep 15, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Sure... it's called WinForms.
    Seriously though, the security risk is so great that most would never allow
    it to be installed.

    --
    Curt Christianson
    site: http://www.darkfalz.com
    blog: http://blog.darkfalz.com



    "PJ6" wrote:

    > Are there any plans for broswers to support a real language client-side, and
    > not just "cripple script"? Will we ever have the luxury of programming using
    > Framework classes client-side some day?
    >
    > Paul
    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Q3VydF9DIFtNVlBd?=, Sep 15, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. PJ6

    Guest

    The reason, for client side langauges having restricted features, is
    security concerns. Seeing the frequency viruses/hacks are being
    announced, I belive it will only become even more restricted in the
    future :)
     
    , Sep 15, 2005
    #3
  4. PJ6

    Oliver Wong Guest

    "PJ6" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Are there any plans for broswers to support a real language client-side,
    > and not just "cripple script"? Will we ever have the luxury of programming
    > using Framework classes client-side some day?


    I think your best bet for a "real" programming language that runs on the
    client side is Java (note that this is distinct from "JavaScript").

    - Oliver
     
    Oliver Wong, Sep 15, 2005
    #4
  5. PJ6

    darrel Guest

    > Are there any plans for broswers to support a real language client-side,
    and
    > not just "cripple script"? Will we ever have the luxury of programming

    using
    > Framework classes client-side some day?


    If you're using a real language and wanting to make applications, then why
    bother with the browser in the first place?

    -Darrel
     
    darrel, Sep 15, 2005
    #5
  6. "PJ6" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Are there any plans for broswers to support a real language client-side,
    > and not just "cripple script"? Will we ever have the luxury of programming
    > using Framework classes client-side some day?


    I'd be happy with cripple script and a consistent API.

    While IE may have almost the entire markets share, it would still be nice to
    have your client script run on every browser.
     
    John MacIntyre, Sep 15, 2005
    #6
  7. PJ6

    PJ6 Guest

    "darrel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > If you're using a real language and wanting to make applications, then why
    > bother with the browser in the first place?
    >
    > -Darrel


    You're preaching to the choir, man. But everyone's all web this, web that. I
    avoided it as long as I could.

    Paul
     
    PJ6, Sep 16, 2005
    #7
  8. PJ6

    PJ6 Guest

    I just don't see a necessary correlation between the power of a language and
    it's ability to do damage - proper design should separate object
    creation/execution and whatever else the language allows at runtime from
    direct system access. Java has this whole "virtual machine" thing (which I
    admit I know very little about), it would seem to me not an overly difficult
    (if labor-intensive) concept to apply security restrictions to the Framework
    as a whole, to allow WinForms-style functionality over the web. The
    Framework has been compiled for Linux, I think it would be an excellent
    candidate for a new web UI standard. Screw this clunky HTML/Java crap. To me
    it all looks like just a hack to get around a system that was never intended
    to do what it does now.

    If you're next response is "you don't know what you're talking about", then
    fine; I admit I'm a newbie. This is just how I see the state of web
    application development at the moment. I come from years of real application
    development, its ugliness frustrates and surprises me.

    Paul

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The reason, for client side langauges having restricted features, is
    > security concerns. Seeing the frequency viruses/hacks are being
    > announced, I belive it will only become even more restricted in the
    > future :)
    >
     
    PJ6, Sep 16, 2005
    #8
  9. "PJ6" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    [snip]
    > Framework has been compiled for Linux, I think it would be an excellent
    > candidate for a new web UI standard. Screw this clunky HTML/Java crap. To
    > me it all looks like just a hack to get around a system that was never
    > intended to do what it does now.
    >

    [snip]

    Theres a paradigm shift moving from Windows apps to web-apps. You lose the
    ability to quickly respond to user actions. IMHO; trying to compensate for
    that with applets or smartclient is not the way to go. Don't get me wrong,
    applets & smartclients have thier place, but I don't think compensating for
    the limitations of HTML qualifies.

    Why do you want a client heavy UI functionality? Why don't you do all the
    real application work on the server & deliver standard HTML to the client,
    with as little client side script as possible?

    There are good ways to handle this; ASP.NET and Java are both great. If you
    prefer Java, look into MVC architecture and STRUTS.
    http://struts.apache.org/

    If you REALLY WANT an app with immediate response functionality similar to a
    windows application and pages refresh; it is possible .. I've done it.
    Keep in mind that the more browsers & browser versions you try to support,
    the more problems you will have. But if you insist on doing it that way,
    build your application in client side script and have a 0x0 iframe which
    submits and recieves data.

    That's my 2 cents FWIW, I hope it helps.

    --
    Regards,
    John MacIntyre
    http://www.johnmacintyre.ca
    Specializing in; Database, Web-Applications, and Windows Software
     
    John MacIntyre, Sep 16, 2005
    #9
  10. woops .. typo

    .....
    > If you REALLY WANT an app with immediate response functionality similar to
    > a windows application and pages refresh; it is possible .. I've done it.

    ...

    that line should be "and NO page refresh"
     
    John MacIntyre, Sep 16, 2005
    #10
  11. PJ6

    Oliver Wong Guest

    "PJ6" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I just don't see a necessary correlation between the power of a language
    >and it's ability to do damage


    The more powerful the language, the more complex it is. And the more
    complex it is, the harder it is to prove theorems about it. And the harder
    it is to prove theorems about it, the harder it is to prove that it cannot
    deal damage (this is a gross oversimplification of Godel's Incompleteness
    Theorem).

    > proper design should separate object creation/execution and whatever else
    > the language allows at runtime from direct system access.


    The question isn't whether or not the program will be harmful if it is
    properly designed; The question is rather, how can we guarantee that the
    program will not be able to damage the client's computer, even if the author
    of the program was malicious and trying to circumvent every security measure
    we put in place?

    If you create a language which cannot read or write files, then you
    don't have to worry about a malicious program deleting all the files on the
    client's computer, or worry about it reading sensitive data. But then you
    have a "crippled language".

    > Java has this whole "virtual machine" thing (which I admit I know very
    > little about), it would seem to me not an overly difficult (if
    > labor-intensive) concept to apply security restrictions to the Framework
    > as a whole, to allow WinForms-style functionality over the web.


    In theory, it isn't too difficult. In practice though, these frameworks
    contain a LOT of code, and any software which contains a lot of code
    inevitably has bugs in it. And if the bug happens to be in a
    security-enforcing module, then you're in big trouble.

    - Oliver
     
    Oliver Wong, Sep 16, 2005
    #11
  12. PJ6

    Guest

    WinForms-style functionality will not be possible in web because of the
    nature of it. There is only limited job (mostly UI and some validation
    functions) we are getting done at client side, and rest of the code is
    in the Server.

    When you need the powerful features of a framework at the client side,
    that also need a powerful compiler/interpreter at the client computer
    that can process the language. Also need a good processor and memory
    for it. Probably some garbge collection object pooling etc also...

    The main purpose of web is to deliver to mass audience. Client machines
    could be PDAs or 20" flat panel. Client machine speed could be 100 MHZ
    or 4 GHZ. Client machine memory could be < 100 MB.

    So for every client to understand, it is necessary to use simple
    scripting in HTML, JAVASCRIPT as a standard

    by the way.. JavaScript supports User Objects, Error Handling,
    Extending intrinsic objects with new functions, Processing XML and many
    other features.
     
    , Sep 16, 2005
    #12
  13. PJ6

    Guest

    WinForms-style functionality will not be possible in web because of the

    nature of it. There is only limited job (mostly UI and some validation
    functions) we are getting done at client side, and rest of the code is
    in the Server.


    When you need the powerful features of a framework at the client side,
    that also need a powerful compiler/interpreter at the client computer
    that can process the language. Also need a good processor and memory
    for it. Probably some garbge collection object pooling etc also...


    The main purpose of web is to deliver to mass audience. Client machines

    could be PDAs or 20" flat panel. Client machine speed could be 100 MHZ
    or 4 GHZ. Client machine memory could be < 100 MB.


    So for every client to understand, it is necessary to use simple
    scripting in HTML, JAVASCRIPT as a standard


    by the way.. JavaScript supports User Objects, Error Handling,
    Extending intrinsic objects with new functions, Processing XML and many

    other features.
     
    , Sep 16, 2005
    #13
  14. PJ6

    Guest

    WinForms-style functionality will not be possible in web because of the

    nature of it. There is only limited job (mostly UI and some validation
    functions) we are getting done at client side, and rest of the code is
    in the Server.


    When you need the powerful features of a framework at the client side,
    that also need a powerful compiler/interpreter at the client computer
    that can process the language. Also need a good processor and memory
    for it. Probably some garbge collection object pooling etc also...


    The main purpose of web is to deliver to mass audience. Client machines

    could be PDAs or 20" flat panel. Client machine speed could be 100 MHZ
    or 4 GHZ. Client machine memory could be < 100 MB.


    So for every client to understand, it is necessary to use simple
    scripting in HTML, JAVASCRIPT as a standard


    by the way.. JavaScript supports User Objects, Error Handling,
    Extending intrinsic objects with new functions, Processing XML and many

    other features.
     
    , Sep 16, 2005
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mark Healey

    Probably a dumb s/// question.

    Mark Healey, Mar 16, 2005, in forum: Perl
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    516
    Glenn Jackman
    Mar 16, 2005
  2. Tibby

    Another dumb question

    Tibby, Jul 31, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    373
    Tibby
    Aug 5, 2003
  3. ItNerd

    Basic simple dumb question

    ItNerd, Apr 14, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,554
    ItNerd
    Apr 15, 2004
  4. Edward
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,423
    Edward
    Jun 11, 2004
  5. Jerry C.
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    245
    Uri Guttman
    Nov 23, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page