[hunchentoot-devel] New releases of Hunchentoot, Drakma, and Chunga

[Jochen Schmidt]

Am 20.02.2009 um 15:35 schrieb Edi Weitz:

>
>
>> As printing backtraces isn't really a core functionality of a
>> webserver I do not understand why having it only for lw (with  
>> conditionals)
>> would have been such a big problem?
>
> I don't understand the question.  The previous release had backtrace
> functionality for all supported Lisps.

Sorry - my error -  I just didn't understand why portability issues  
made it necessary to explicitely drop
the backtrace stuff.

>
>
>> Just to make it clear - I personally do
>> not miss it - but I would miss some other parts in hunchentoot were
>> Lispworks is specially handled instead of using what is implemented  
>> for
>> other lisps (e. g. some taskmanager stuff). There was a time in
>> hunchentoot-dev development were I guessed Hans would throw the  
>> baby out
>> with the bath water ;-) - I'm happy to see that this didn't happen.
>
> As you might know, Hunchentoot was historically a LW-only library and
> thus its architecture was based in part on LispWork's way of
> implementing TCP/IP servers.

Yes I know - it was one of the reasons I switched from paserve to  
hunchentoot.

> While Hunchentoot now aims to be portable to several Lisp
> implementations, my policy still is that I care mostly about the
> LispWorks port and that's the one I'm working and testing with.  Also,
> I don't want to deal with gazillions of portability libraries just to
> load a pretty simple and straightforward web server.  (I would make an
> exception for trivial-backtrace as it seems pretty small and
> self-contained.)

Thats exactly my reasoning too. After paserve I used UCW for a while -  
it just got to hairy to me.

> There's also a technical reason for keeping LW-specific stuff in
> there: Doing things the way they are done in usocket now would mean
> that we'd have to use undocumented and unsupported features of
> LispWorks.  I don't think that's a good idea.

Yes - thats very important to me too. I've done a significant  
investment and bought LW licenses for all platforms I support. Using  
undocumented features is almost always a bad idea even tough being  
sometimes unavoidable - but it shouldn't be in the case of a plain web  
server.

> So, if you're missing anything specifically for LispWorks or if you
> think the situation for LispWorks became worse due to the new release,
> I'm all ears.  (Except for the debugging stuff we already discussed.
> See next release.)

No I'm missing nothing - as I said my beginning my fears did not come  
true - Hans and you did a very good job and I'm happy to switch my  
servers to the final hunchentoot-dev asap.

ciao,
Jochen

--
Jochen Schmidt
CRISPYLOGICS
Uhlandstr. 9 , 90408 Nuremberg

Fon +49 (0)911 517 999 82
Fax +49 (0)911 517 999 83

mailto:info at crispylogics.com
http://www.crispylogics.com