[hunchentoot-devel] mod_lisp anyone?
Andrea Chiumenti
kiuma72 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 9 17:06:22 UTC 2008
In my case, as I'm developing CLAW, using mod_proxy instead of mod_lisp
shouldn't be a problem.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Edi Weitz <edi at agharta.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:24:30 +0200, Ralf Mattes <rm at seid-online.de> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I _thought_ that was clear. I've to admit that we are currently
> > not using mod_lisp, just the standalone version, but it gives me a
> > cozzy feeling to know that I _could_ get tighter integration once
> > need arises.
>
> Have you actually used mod_lisp for something like that before? I
> asked because I couldn't really come up with a convincing case where
> you'd get tighter Apache integration that way. I've done quite a lot
> of Apache hacking in my pre-Lisp life, but working with something like
> mod_perl or writing your own modules in C is certainly different from
> using mod_lisp.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tbnl-devel site list
> tbnl-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/tbnl-devel
>
More information about the Tbnl-devel
mailing list