bedouin-devel — Developer discussion

Re: [web-caml] [Bedouin-devel] CGI module

[Michael L. <le...@nw...>]

Yes!

I am signed up on PLEAC to do the OCaml version of CGI... but I've been put
off by the number of options, which should also include OcamlHTML in
addition to those listed. :-/

http://pleac.sourceforge.net/

http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/mine/ocamlhtml/

I'd suggest that anything hoping to attract Perl coders strongly resemble
the API for Perl's CGI; i.e. sorry, I don't care for the C++ syntax in one
of the others.  Or, alternately, something simple and slick.  Functions
named ~foo are not slick, IMO (shifting the key farthest away from the home
row isn't something I want to do all day).  Same for <<< operators.  Just
my $.01999 coming from the land of Perl.

OTOH, I'd be all for something resembling the separation between code and
HTML that you get from using Apache[::Registry et al] and, say, template
toolkit 2.  One module for each, perhaps.  Just keep the syntax friendly
and powerful.  ;o)

Mike


On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 07:51:57PM -0400, Patrick M Doane wrote:
> I propose that the first module we deliver for Bedouin be a CGI module.
> 
> Since there are at least 3 different APIs implemented in Caml and many
> developed for other languages, I think we would benefit from going through
> an analysis and design phase.  This should help us define our development
> process before tackling some of the harder issues.
> 
> I'm aware of the following CGI implementations for Caml:
> 
>   - Gerd Stolpmann's excellent netstring library includes a CGI
>     implementation and many other commonly used string processing functions 
>     for Internet applications.
> 
>   - Jean-Christophe FILLIATRE's CGI module provides the basic support
>     needed for form-based applications.
> 
>   - The CGI module used by INRIA for the ICFP contest. I'm not aware if
>     this is available, but the .mli file was recently included in an
>     e-mail from Xavier Leroy.  It appears to be an extesion of the former
>     to support multipart arguments.
> 
> There are obviously countless implementations for Perl, Python, Java, etc.
> 
> What opinions do people have on these modules and their functionality?
> What aspects are missing or belong elsewhere?
> 
> I would like to see a comparison of functionality among the various
> implementations. Does this seem to be a useful task to others as well?
> 
> One area where I feel Caml can really shine is by providing elegant
> solutions for problems. With this in mind, I think it is crucial that we 
> provide top-notch APIs.
> 
> Patrick Doane
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bedouin-devel mailing list
> Bed...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bedouin-devel
> -----------------
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to maj...@qu..., with
> body "unsubscribe web-caml".

-- 

[Bedouin-devel] CGI module

[Patrick M D. <pa...@wa...>]

I propose that the first module we deliver for Bedouin be a CGI module.

Since there are at least 3 different APIs implemented in Caml and many
developed for other languages, I think we would benefit from going through
an analysis and design phase.  This should help us define our development
process before tackling some of the harder issues.

I'm aware of the following CGI implementations for Caml:

  - Gerd Stolpmann's excellent netstring library includes a CGI
    implementation and many other commonly used string processing functions 
    for Internet applications.

  - Jean-Christophe FILLIATRE's CGI module provides the basic support
    needed for form-based applications.

  - The CGI module used by INRIA for the ICFP contest. I'm not aware if
    this is available, but the .mli file was recently included in an
    e-mail from Xavier Leroy.  It appears to be an extesion of the former
    to support multipart arguments.

There are obviously countless implementations for Perl, Python, Java, etc.

What opinions do people have on these modules and their functionality?
What aspects are missing or belong elsewhere?

I would like to see a comparison of functionality among the various
implementations. Does this seem to be a useful task to others as well?

One area where I feel Caml can really shine is by providing elegant
solutions for problems. With this in mind, I think it is crucial that we 
provide top-notch APIs.

Patrick Doane