If you had JavaScript running server-side...?

[Peter Michaux]

I'm writing a server-side web application framework using Mozilla's
Rhino JavaScript engine. My two primary motivations are so I can write
code on server and client sides without needing to switch gears
mentally and so that the server and client can share code.

The types of code sharing I know I can use immediately are form
validations and html previews. For form validation, I'll be able to
specify the regexp for what is an email address in just one language
rather than in both Perl|Python|Ruby|Java|etc and in JavaScript. For
something like a blog comment form or a wiki editor, where the user
can use *bold* or _underline_ syntax, the algorithm to convert this
code to HTML will only need to be expressed in one language. This
makes live previews in the editor much easier to implement.

I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if you
had server-side framework running JavaScript.

Thanks,
Peter

 

[stevenmoberg]

I'm writing a server-side web application framework using Mozilla's
Rhino JavaScript engine. My two primary motivations are so I can write
code on server and client sides without needing to switch gears
mentally and so that the server and client can share code.

The types of code sharing I know I can use immediately are form
validations and html previews. For form validation, I'll be able to
specify the regexp for what is an email address in just one language
rather than in both Perl|Python|Ruby|Java|etc and in JavaScript. For
something like a blog comment form or a wiki editor, where the user
can use *bold* or _underline_ syntax, the algorithm to convert this
code to HTML will only need to be expressed in one language. This
makes live previews in the editor much easier to implement.

I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if you
had server-side framework running JavaScript.

Thanks,
Peter

I've recreated the Prototype 1.6.0 Library on the server side. Just
go through the script and pull out references to DOM objects. This
will give you basic OOP functionality. You may also want to look at
Base2 or ExtJS for there implementations of inheritance.

Utilizing the prototype.toString method comes in really handy when
designing widgets.
function Tree(){
this.branches = [];
};
Tree.prototype = {
read: function(sql){
// run ado query
// populate tree with branches
},
addBranch: function(branch){
this.branches.push(branch);
branch.parent = this;
},
toString: function(){
var html = [];
this.branches.each(function(branch){
html.push(branch);
}
return "<ul>" + html.join("") + "</ul>";
}
}

var itemTree = new Tree();
itemTree.read(sqlString);

Response.Write(itemTree);



You can already do this within ASP, just change your language
declaration to "Javascript".

I'm also creating an ASP Framework. It's a port of Fusebox (from the
ColdFusion community) written in JScript, but it will work with either
JScript or VBScript applications.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

[...]
I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if you
had server-side framework running JavaScript.
[...]

I've recreated the Prototype 1.6.0 Library on the server side. [...]

See <

PointedEars

 

[Peter Michaux]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 1/20/2008 6:49 AM:

[...]
I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if you
had server-side framework running JavaScript.
[...]
I've recreated the Prototype 1.6.0 Library on the server side. [...]

See <news:[email protected]>

That's nice[1].

You disagree with Thomas' sentiment or is it the odd way he linked it?

Just in case anyone has problems with Thomas' link style...

<URL: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/76e2debc87edaf10>

Peter

 

[Evertjan.]

Peter Michaux wrote on 20 jan 2008 in comp.lang.javascript:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 1/20/2008 6:49 AM:

(e-mail address removed) wrote:
[...]
I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if
you had server-side framework running JavaScript.
[...]
I've recreated the Prototype 1.6.0 Library on the server side.
[...]

See <news:[email protected]>

That's nice[1].

You disagree with Thomas' sentiment or is it the odd way he linked it?

It is not an odd way to link a News Article, but the standard way.

My and most other mail readers support it.

Just in case anyone has problems with Thomas' link style...

<URL:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/76e2debc87edaf1
0>

That is not the link to the News article,
but [perhaps, not tested] to the archived version of it.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 1/20/2008 6:49 AM:

(e-mail address removed) wrote:
[...]
I'm curious what other bits of common (or uncommon) client-side
functionality that you would be able to share with the server if you
had server-side framework running JavaScript.
[...]
I've recreated the Prototype 1.6.0 Library on the server side. [...]
See <news:[email protected]>

That's nice[1].

You disagree with Thomas' sentiment

There is no sentiment that can be found there, but is an explanation why an
approach is misguided and the result of following it is ultimately bad.

or is it the odd way he linked it?

The way it is being referred to is not at all odd; it is the way that is
supported by most newsreaders, including Windows' built-in Outlook express
and Google Groups. (Just click the link that OE and GG create from it.)

Just in case anyone has problems with Thomas' link style...

It is not my link style. It is not even really a link, that is what some
newsreaders make of it. (Think of what would have happened if I had posted
a proper Message-ID header value instead ...)

<URL: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/76e2debc87edaf10>

It works, but it makes little sense, if any. Despite what Google Groups and
other mirrors want you to believe, Usenet is not on the Web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet


PointedEars

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 1/20/2008 2:24 PM:

Nobody said Usenet is on the Web. The archives for Usenet are on the Web
though. And that is what Peter linked to was the archive of that post.

Several, but not all, Usenet archives are available via the Web. Those that
are on the Web are neither complete, nor do they always present the original
article. Google Groups in its current form makes no exception.

Furthermore, Web archives are not required to access an article that was
posted only a few days ago; there is no public news server that has such a
short expiration setting.

And if my articles eventually expire, both will only be available in the
archives, be they public or private. In fact, my (Google) research showed
that providers of public Usenet archives have been going to great lengths to
support `URIs in the way I posted as being rewritten to links to
their archives.


EOD

PointedEars

 

[Peter Michaux]

[snip regarding linking to news archives]

So do you guys have any thoughts about sharing code on the client and
server sides? ;-)

Peter