On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 18:31 +0200, Rudolf Korhummel wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > Please have a look at this very interesting programming language: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck > . > Even very minimalistic devices are supported ! > > ++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>++.>+.+++++++..+++.>++.<<+++ > ++++++++++++.>.+++.------.--------.>+.>.
lol fun with programming. salu2 > > Rudolf > > > > Richard Frovarp schrieb: > >> Andreas Hartmann wrote: > >>> I think we should seriously consider migrating to another > >>> platform. I'm sure there must be good reasons that most CMS's are > >>> written in PHP anyway. There are some quite powerful frameworks > >>> (Zend, PEAR) to implement complex web applications. Combined with > >>> a mature JavaScript library like Dojo or YUI we could create a > >>> productive system in an acceptable timeframe. I think moving to > >>> PHP would also help to increase the potential user base. > >>> > >>> BTW, recently I did a project using .Net, and I was very > >>> positively suprised and think it would be a viable alternative. We > >>> could finally get rid of those endorsed libraries issues and of > >>> all our legacy code. > >>> > >>> Maybe there are other platforms worth considering? E.g. Ruby on > >>> Rails? > >>> > >> I think we're missing the bigger picture here. Servers are coming > >> with more sockets and more cores. It's now about concurrency, not > >> how fast an individual thread runs. It is way too tough to do this > >> in an imperative language. For this reason we should switch to a > >> functional programming language. > > > > Very good point. > > > >> At the top of my list would be LISP. If something as powerful as > >> Emacs can be written in LISP, I think it would serve us well. In > >> fact, if you issue a C-x M-c M-cms, it will generate the skeleton > >> of a CMS in LISP for you. If you tack on a 1, that will get you the > >> Clojure derivative, which may be a little more modern, and get us > >> away from all of the parentheses. > > > > Thanks for those pointers, I'll do some prototyping asap! > > > >> I think the strongest option would be to write it all in XSLT. > >> Think about it, it's a Turing complete functional language. We get > >> concurrency and the ability to run on any platform with an XSLT > >> engine! It could then run under Java, .Net, Ruby, Python, or PHP. > >> Sadly, I do not know if there is an XSLT engine for PL/1. > > > > I totally agree, XSLT would be a very good choice. Since we already > > use XSLT for the presentation layer, using it for the business logic > > as well would tremendously reduce the learning curve. Recursive > > document() function calls will be a great replacement for Cocoon's > > XML pipelines. > > > > Remember the discussion whether to organize the codebase according > > to file types or according to functional modules? When we migrate > > everything to XSLT, we could just put all code files in the > > $LENYA_HOME/xslt folder and have a very clean and easy to understand > > codebase. > > > > > Thanks for your valuable input! > > > > -- Andreas > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > -- Thorsten Scherler <thorsten.at.apache.org> Open Source Java <consulting, training and solutions> Sociedad Andaluza para el Desarrollo de la Sociedad de la Información, S.A.U. (SADESI) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
