marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com
Thu Apr 21 03:33:18 CDT 2005
> result is that araneida is nearly unmaintained, while worse solutions
> like mod_lisp and paserve are more actively maintained.
I beg to differ here about mod_lisp being a worse solution than araneida.
First I think you don't understand what mod_lisp is really about: mod_lisp
is only an apache module and there is no Lisp functionality to compare with
araneida. So if you want to compare a mod_lisp based system to araneida you
have to pick a Lisp framework based on mod_lisp.
So now if you compare araneida to the mod_lisp based solution you have:
apache/mod_proxy + araneida
apache/mod_lisp + TBNL
apache/mod_lisp + UCW
apache/mod_lisp + my own framework
Now on what points are the mod_lisp based solutions worse?
mod_lisp is faster than mod_proxy
mod_lisp is well integrated into apache
mod_lisp is corporate compatible
mod_lisp is maintained and has an active users base
mod_lisp is very stable and mature
And the 3 frameworks I named have all more functionalities, are at a much
higher level and are actively evolving.
The HTTP processing is a boring problem which have been solved for years
now. These days the interesting stuff is in the framework/application
layers. The current topics are on subjects like continuations or not for
instance. Pascal Costanza is organizing a debate next Monday between Avi
Bryant and me where we will present our frameworks and I can assure you that
nobody will care and talk about the HTTP layers. Everybody interested in the
subject is invited to participate.
More information about the lispweb