Qooxdoo does Cells!!!!! (almost)

K

Kenny

Kenny said:
Cells ala qooxdoo:

http://qooxdoo.org/documentation/0.7/properties

Cells?:

http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/cells-manifesto.html

qooxdoo has "push" and "observe" (well, rolled into one, not the same is
it?), not "pull", so it is a little brittle and more work, but maybe I
can sell them on a fuller implementation.

Or maybe I should do it as a separate library so even Mr. Marks can
enjoy it?

Ah, hang on. I forgot about: http://www.flapjax-lang.org/

And of course OpenLaszlo also does the reactive thing... but maybe a
pure JS-only implementation would have some appeal?

Meanwhile, the marketer in me says hook my wagon to qooxdoo and just
extend their FRP-lite -- new technology has to be a small step for
developers, and both FlapJax and OpenLaszlo are a total framework
adaptation, tho FlapJax says we can Just Use the Library without buying
into the language.

I'll check it out, see if JCells would have anything to offer over that.

kt
 
J

Joost Diepenmaat

Kenny said:
Cells ala qooxdoo:

http://qooxdoo.org/documentation/0.7/properties

Cells?:

http://smuglispweeny.blogspot.com/2008/02/cells-manifesto.html

qooxdoo has "push" and "observe" (well, rolled into one, not the same is
it?), not "pull", so it is a little brittle and more work, but maybe I
can sell them on a fuller implementation.

So how are you going to hook them together? IOW, how are you planning on
doing the observing of server-side models by the browser code? Something
Comet-like?

Cheers,
J.
 
K

Kenny

Joost said:
So how are you going to hook them together? IOW, how are you planning on
doing the observing of server-side models by the browser code? Something
Comet-like?

Not yet clearly seen thru the mist.

Option A: Just layer something atop the qooxdoo mechanism, to lure
existing users into "pull". The idea here being that too big a chasm
limits uptake to rare individuals.

Option B: Forget the qooxdoo mechanism and create a Lisp-solution that
drives everything from Lisp, obviously an ideal for development but then
we miss performance possible by letting the client do the work without
bothering the server. In this scenario all events are piped straight to
the server.

Option C: Just do a pure JS Cells ignoring the qooxdoo object extension
and even the server.

Hmmm. Maybe A then A+B, keeping A alive when doing B, ie, make it
possible to code heavily on the client-side from the Lisp side by piping
dependencies over to JS.*

Option C seems ideal if I want to continue the Cells tradition of being
used by about five people.

Comet is a detail, tho obviously an important detail to be tackled as
soon as I understand Comet. :) I think the infrastructure can be built
with the Lisp-side driven only by client-side events, then extended
when, again, I figure out Comet.

Maybe Mr. Marks has a nice Comet component!

What scares me overall is the asynchronous nature of XHR. That kinda
knocks the legs out from under the Cells3 idea of data integrity. The
good news is that until Cells3 I did quite nicely without rigorous
integrity -- values would temporarily get out of synch and soon enough
get back in synch. Perhaps it is time for Cells5 (Cells 2 and 3
together, with 2 by default and 3 only if explicitly requested. Hmm...)

kzo

* One fun idea I had when discussing OpenAIR with Brian was that
developers would Just Write Rules in Lisp and then an optimizer would
detect that a rule relied only on slots that were Lisp-side proxies for
qooxdoo (well, JS) properties and then silently promote a rule to exist
only on the client. How cool would that be?
 
K

Kenny

David said:
Stop posting your personal diary to this group.

I am not ignoring you, I am just ignoring the unpleasant stuff you post.

(This is an ignoring non-ignore, in case you feel something
self-referential coming on.)

peace,k
 
D

David Mark

I am not ignoring you, I am just ignoring the unpleasant stuff you post.

Idiot. This newsgroup is not your diary. That may not be pleasant
for you (for whatever reason), but it is a fact. Stop posting your
daily trials and tribulations.
 
M

Matthias Watermann

Meanwhile, the marketer in me says hook my wagon to qooxdoo

In case there's a developer "in" you as well, you should tell him to
switch on a JavaScript error-console and/or debugger. After doing that
he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings. And if he's serious with
his work (i.e. not just a marketing troll) he'll most probably refrain
from using a library that emits more than zero JavaScript warnings.


--
Matthias
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
X - AGAINST M$ ATTACHMENTS
/ \
 
D

David Mark

In case there's a developer "in" you as well, you should tell him to
switch on a JavaScript error-console and/or debugger. After doing that
he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings. And if he's serious with

Now we see the incompetence inherent in the system.
his work (i.e. not just a marketing troll) he'll most probably refrain
from using a library that emits more than zero JavaScript warnings.

"Kenny" has been previously outed as either a troll or a mental
defective.

[snip]
 
K

Kenny

Matthias said:
In case there's a developer "in" you as well, you should tell him to
switch on a JavaScript error-console and/or debugger.

Is Firebug OK?
After doing that
he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.

Well, yes, but only when I go to CNN or NYTimes or any place else. Tho I
did turn off the CSS warnings.

As for my own page, the only errors I get are when I confuse things with
the mime type.
And if he's serious with
his work (i.e. not just a marketing troll)

You have that backwards. I have nothing to do with qooxdoo except as a
user, I am excited about it because I am a serious developer and have
just gone thru five weeks of hell trying various jquery widgets, then
dojo, then yui, and yes learning finally qooxdoo all under the gun of
deadlines.
he'll most probably refrain
from using a library that emits more than zero JavaScript warnings.

does not seem to be an issue, as much as you all want it to be.

The fact is you guys are the trolls, attacking for the sake of attacking
with no basis for your comments, and making ad homineum attacks instead
of talking about the merits of the technology.

peace,k
 
M

Matthias Watermann

Is Firebug OK?

Sure. However, for a first impression the error-console is enough. Just
let it show you everything problematic.
Well, yes, but only when I go to CNN or NYTimes or any place else. Tho I
did turn off the CSS warnings.

I didn't talk about sites using that library nor about CSS. What I'm
referring to is the library's own documentation i.e. what you get after
extracting the distribution archive:
./qooxdoo-0.8-sdk/framework/api/index.html
[...]
he'll most probably refrain
from using a library that emits more than zero JavaScript warnings.
does not seem to be an issue, as much as you all want it to be.

Well, everyone's free to check for her/himself. And just to be clear, I
don't "want" that software to be bad. In fact I gave it a fair try (and
I'd love to see a library that's useful and w/o errors/warnings).
But when the warnings pop up faster than I can read I'm not inclined to
use it as a basis for whatever projects I'm working on.


--
Matthias
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
X - AGAINST M$ ATTACHMENTS
/ \
 
K

Kenny

Matthias said:
Sure. However, for a first impression the error-console is enough. Just
let it show you everything problematic.

There is no error-console. Not nit-picking, actually worried there is
another console I could be watching. There is a "console" tab in Firebug
(under FF3 anyway) and that is where I see errors. If that is what you
mean, I am not getting any errors and I turned on CSS errors and I am
still not getting any.

Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.

As for might return NULL, sounds like C++ or Java to me. As in, yeah,
technically it might if my application is not working, but I am a
Lisper, I use other methods to decide if my application is working, not
an OCD compiler.

Is that what this is all about?
I didn't talk about sites using that library nor about CSS. What I'm
referring to is the library's own documentation i.e. what you get after
extracting the distribution archive:
./qooxdoo-0.8-sdk/framework/api/index.html

Browsing now in FF3, no errors. I must not understand you.
[...]
he'll most probably refrain
from using a library that emits more than zero JavaScript warnings.

does not seem to be an issue, as much as you all want it to be.


Well, everyone's free to check for her/himself. And just to be clear, I
don't "want" that software to be bad. In fact I gave it a fair try (and
I'd love to see a library that's useful and w/o errors/warnings).

So get involved with qooxdoo. Or do a new one from the ground up if one
wants to waste some person-years.

Or are we waiting for the Open Source Fairy to leave one under our
pillow? That would be awesome!
But when the warnings pop up faster than I can read I'm not inclined to
use it as a basis for whatever projects I'm working on.

So are we down to concern over warnings only? ie, the OCD warnings
issued on code that will in fact fail only if something else is wrong
such as me removing from the interface a button some other code is still
trying to get to?

kt
 
M

Matthias Watermann

Matthias said:
Matthias Watermann wrote:

]
After doing that he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.
Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.

And that doesn't make you think? And there were other problems such as
referencing undefined properties and functions not always returning a
value etc.pp.
[...]
Is that what this is all about?

Now, if a library doesn't even get the semantics of its language right
(just look at what JSLint can tell you about it) I'm not very much
inclined to validate its logic. But obviously your tolerance is much
higher and apparently you don't care about the users of the application
you're trying to build. Well, of course that's completely up to you. And
if you're happy with it so be it.
[...]
Well, everyone's free to check for her/himself. And just to be clear, I
don't "want" that software to be bad. In fact I gave it a fair try (and
I'd love to see a library that's useful and w/o errors/warnings).

So get involved with qooxdoo.

Why should I get involved with a project that obviously doesn't care about
a "clean" code base? No, thank you very much. And the fact that the
software is copyrighted by a big ISP doesn't make me feel better at all.
[...]
Or are we waiting for the Open Source Fairy to leave one under our
pillow? That would be awesome!

It would be a nice surprise, indeed. But as that probably won't happen
for the time being I'll stick with my own code that evolved over the
years. But, again, if you're happy with that swollen package please
yourself. Just stop marketing here.


--
Matthias
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
X - AGAINST M$ ATTACHMENTS
/ \
 
D

David Mark

[...]
After doing that he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.
Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.

And that doesn't make you think? And there were other problems such as
referencing undefined properties and functions not always returning a
value etc.pp.

Interesting. I thought you were referring to CSS warnings. Strict
warnings in FF? Mostly harmful.
[...]
Is that what this is all about?

Now, if a library doesn't even get the semantics of its language right
(just look at what JSLint can tell you about it) I'm not very much
inclined to validate its logic. But obviously your tolerance is much

If it flunks JSLint, that is another story.

[snip]
 
K

Kenny

Matthias said:
Matthias said:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:24:40 -0500, Kenny wrote:


Matthias Watermann wrote:


On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:25:46 -0500, Kenny wrote:

[...]

After doing that he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.
Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.


And that doesn't make you think?

The option in firebug itself warns of serious degradation. Multiply that
by 800kb and no, it does not concern me.
And there were other problems such as
referencing undefined properties

OK, so I say if (x.y)... and y lacks the property altogether so the test
fails, fine. If I do arithmetic with it it fails the first time I run
the code. If the concern is insufficient code coverage in unit tests we
are back to the strong static typing debate -- is that it?
and functions not always returning a
value etc.pp.

As a Lisper I certainly appreciate functional programming, but I am not
surprised others do not and even I write functions only for their
side-effects so why does a function always have to return a value?

I am starting to think this is definitely the issue: the classic debate
over strong static typing.
[...]
Is that what this is all about?


Now, if a library doesn't even get the semantics of its language right
(just look at what JSLint can tell you about it) I'm not very much
inclined to validate its logic.

Your conclusion simply does not follow. It would follow if the library
authors with you liked the idea of the compiler verifying everything and
the library came up short in that respect, but I am guessing most
javascript developers are more into the "agile" thing one gets with
languages such as Python/Ruby/Perl/Lisp in which one does not get all
OCD as mandated by, say, C++ and even worse Java.

But obviously your tolerance is much
higher and apparently you don't care about the users of the application
you're trying to build.

The second half of that sentence is complete bullshit. But you obviously
know that. :)

Why should I get involved with a project that obviously doesn't care about
a "clean" code base? No, thank you very much. And the fact that the
software is copyrighted by a big ISP doesn't make me feel better at all.

Everything is /copyrighted/ by its author whether they put a copyright
on it or not. The question is the license, and unless I missed something
theirs is fine.
[...]
Or are we waiting for the Open Source Fairy to leave one under our
pillow? That would be awesome!


It would be a nice surprise, indeed. But as that probably won't happen
for the time being I'll stick with my own code that evolved over the
years. But, again, if you're happy with that swollen package please
yourself. Just stop marketing here.

Marketing? Good developers tend to like sharing news of good tools with
others. Usenet is a good way for developers to learn about good tools.
It is how I got turned onto Lisp, and only because some Lisper mentioned
qooxdoo did I find it. Had I not I would probably have lost the contract
already. Instead I am ripping thru the app resurrecting it so fast the
client has forgotten about the past four weeks. (Final verdict still
out, I'll keep you posted.)

Folks visiting/lurking this group would probably like to program in JS.
The stuff you guys discuss is useful for that, because those issues do
have to be addressed if one wants to do the moral equivalent of Web
assembler*. Good frameworks like qooxdoo are also useful because they go
the other way and let me work at a higher level.

Some good developers also tend to get religious over static typing (to
abbreviate the issue) and I can see a few here have allowed their strong
preference on that to dictate their assessment of JS libraries.

You guys should make it clear when denouncing qooxdoo that it violates
your C++/Java-training, not that it is a bad library. Better yet, you
should learn to enjoy programming and stop agonizing over always
returning a value.

I do not care what you say about the other libraries. :)

peace, kenny

* That might by me -- I want to do a framework driven by Lisp so I do
not have to write so much JS, with a bare minimum of generic JS to
actually drive the browser. p.k
 
K

Kenny

Kenny said:
Some good developers also tend to get religious over static typing (to
abbreviate the issue) and I can see a few here have allowed their strong
preference on that to dictate their assessment of JS libraries.

To my great delight the great static vs. dynamic debate has broken out
over on c.l.lisp, where a couple of folks are hawking languages with
type inferencing, with all the same QA issues being argued.

:)

kt
 
D

David Mark

Matthias said:
Matthias Watermann wrote:
]
After doing that he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.
Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.
And that doesn't make you think?

The option in firebug itself warns of serious degradation. Multiply that
by 800kb and no, it does not concern me.
And there were other problems such as
referencing undefined properties

OK, so I say if (x.y)... and y lacks the property altogether so the test
fails, fine. If I do arithmetic with it it fails the first time I run
the code. If the concern is insufficient code coverage in unit tests we
are back to the strong static typing debate -- is that it?

Forget it. Those types of warnings are usually without merit. Not
*always* though, which is why they exist. Regardless, the Q00D00
(sp?) bunch have bigger problems than that.
As a Lisper I certainly appreciate functional programming, but I am not
surprised others do not and even I write functions only for their
side-effects so why does a function always have to return a value?

They don't have to return a value.
I am starting to think this is definitely the issue: the classic debate
over strong static typing.


[...]
Is that what this is all about?
Now, if a library doesn't even get the semantics of its language right
(just look at what JSLint can tell you about it) I'm not very much
inclined to validate its logic.

Your conclusion simply does not follow. It would follow if the library
authors with you liked the idea of the compiler verifying everything and

Compiler? JSLint is a script. And certainly a good judge of other
scripts. I'm sure it would hurt your authors' collective feelings.
the library came up short in that respect, but I am guessing most

Way short I imagine.
javascript developers are more into the "agile" thing one gets with
languages such as Python/Ruby/Perl/Lisp in which one does not get all
OCD as mandated by, say, C++ and even worse Java.

Whatever. Based on your description, I could only predict that your
app will be a "sluggish" thing, as will anything else built on your
sponsored framework.
The second half of that sentence is complete bullshit. But you obviously
know that. :)

Kind to me. I think your app is just in your head.
Everything is /copyrighted/ by its author whether they put a copyright
on it or not. The question is the license, and unless I missed something
theirs is fine.

Unless I missed something, you are a /shill/.
[...]
Or are we waiting for the Open Source Fairy to leave one under our
pillow? That would be awesome!
It would be a nice surprise, indeed. But as that probably won't happen
for the time being I'll stick with my own code that evolved over the
years. But, again, if you're happy with that swollen package please
yourself. Just stop marketing here.

Marketing? Good developers tend to like sharing news of good tools with

And what does that have to do with you?
others. Usenet is a good way for developers to learn about good tools.

Or that dead framework?
It is how I got turned onto Lisp, and only because some Lisper mentioned
****** did I find it. Had I not I would probably have lost the contract
already. Instead I am ripping thru the app resurrecting it so fast the
client has forgotten about the past four weeks. (Final verdict still
out, I'll keep you posted.)

All lies.
Folks visiting/lurking this group would probably like to program in JS.
Probably.

The stuff you guys discuss is useful for that, because those issues do
have to be addressed if one wants to do the moral equivalent of Web
assembler*. Good frameworks like ****** are also useful because they go
the other way and let me work at a higher level.

Keep sailing, Bob.

[snip]
 
K

Kenny

Compiler? JSLint is a script. And certainly a good judge of other
scripts. I'm sure it would hurt your authors' collective feelings.

I'll give it a try on my code, let you know what happens.
Way short I imagine.




Whatever. Based on your description, I could only predict that your
app will be a "sluggish" thing, as will anything else built on your
sponsored framework.

No, it is quite zippy, thx. (I will assume you changed the context from
speed of development to runtime not out of confusion over the meaning of
agile.)
Kind to me. I think your app is just in your head.

If it were not, what would that do to your theory?
Unless I missed something, you are a /shill/.

User. If you really care, go find and cite here a post to qooxdoo-devel
before two weeks ago. Good luck with that. If you and your fellow
Panickers have any honesty at all in you, come back with the results and
the results of searches on the YUI list and before that the Dojo list.

Oops. You lose.
All lies.

Google repeats: you lose.

I think the Dojo list will reflect the most desperate moments. You do
not need to go back more than five weeks on any of the three lists
suggested.
Keep sailing, Bob.

Great movie!

p,k
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads


Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top