On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Stefan <[email protected]> wrote: > Fabio Mascarenhas wrote: >> >> Lua coroutines are actually extremely light, the overhead is measured in >> tens of bytes, and a yield/resume pair is not much more work than a >> call/return pair. Later I will write a simple WSAPI adapter for luafcgid and >> show actual numbers. :-) > > I didn't mean coroutines, I was referring to WSAPI. Not that it's heavy, but > I tried to port a transactional gateway to it and it kept getting in my way. > "Grrr, just let me code in my beloved Lua using whatever style I feel like" > I barked at it. > > Like I said - one fellow's flying elephant is another fellow's hummingbird
I think part of the point is that having a standard target for our development (regardless of what form it takes) is a good thing. WSAPI is very small, does very little, and works quite well as a sane API for web server deployment. If you have suggestions, comments, etc. then you should definitely share them.. but WSAPI is a good thing for Lua web development. How much of your difficulties were familiarity with the code that you were trying to target, and how much of it was actual peculiarities with WSAPI? If there are actual problems, can we identify them and address them in order to improve the API? - Jim _______________________________________________ Kepler-Project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kepler-project http://www.keplerproject.org/
