Re: [OT] Play! Framework
Re: [OT] Play! Framework
- Subject: Re: [OT] Play! Framework
- From: Lachlan Deck <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:38:00 +1100
On 11/03/2011, at 8:50 AM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 1:29 PM, Anjo Krank wrote:
>
>> Just finished glancing through a Scala book... how do you implement faulting with it? You know: Bar bar = foo.getBar(). The only thing I saw is continuation-passing, which is async by nature?
>>
>> Cheers, Anjo
>
> In order to use WO stuff with Scala you basically have to remove many of the ideas behind WO first.
That makes no sense...
> Every access to an object in EOF is done via one enormous lock on the entire framework. If you want the benefits of using Scala, you need to go to the old idea that every editing context will need its own entirely separate EOF stack. There is an obvious mis-match in the conceptual frames here....
The one giant lock is the problem whichever language you might choose. How many connections are open is a separate one.
Frameworks such as liftweb do not open an unlimited number of connections to the db.
> I actually think it would be more interesting to see an implementation of WO and EOF in Clojure. It would be harder for people to wrap their heads around Clojure, but it it is a dynamic language like ObjC, and one could actually implement the concepts of WO and EOF in Clojure instead of subverting them, as one would have to do with Scala.
What exactly would have to be subverted? Certainly there would be differences in the implementation should a dynamically typed lang be used, as WO used to be.
But NB: WO currently uses a statically typed language... which works.
with regards,
-
Lachlan Deck
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden