Hey, Sadly, I am not attending Future Decoded.
Miguelk On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Martin Thwaites <monofo...@my2cents.co.uk> wrote: > That's great, there's only a few bits that need doing to make it compile, > and I'm pretty sure I can handle those. > > I've put in some crude implementations of the missing elements to try and > scope the work involved, and unless there's something wrong in those, it > needs some further work under the hood. > > The issue I see us that I'm getting never ending calls to Webapi > endpoints, whereas standard (non-async) MVC controllers work fine. > > So my perception is that there is something stopping the pipeline from > completing. > > I think the best option is to complete the missing elements that I believe > I can do, then possibly post a simple Webapi solution that reproduces it. > Then maybe you could use some of your (obviously large amount of) free time > to have a quick look. Unless there is something off the top of your head > that you think I could look at? > > On a side note, do you think you'll be going to Future Decoded on the > 12th? There's a possibility I might be going and it would be nice to put a > face to the name. > > Thanks > Martin > Hey, > > The changes should be done in Mono. Just enough to have aspnetwebstack > compile out of the box. > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Martin Thwaites < > monofo...@my2cents.co.uk> wrote: > >> Hi Miguel, >> >> That is a great idea around making them synchronous in the background. >> I'm sure this would cause some issues for people, however if we can hit the >> main use cases in the initial stab that would be great. >> >> Are you suggesting that this is done in the Webapi code, or somewhere in >> the mono source. My goal has been to make it so we don't need our own >> implementation of the aspnetwebstack. It would also be great if we can say >> that async controllers work in mono, just run synchronously, rather than >> "use these dlls and Webapi will work". >> >> Thanks for offering to help out, if there is some initial Google terms >> you could point me in the direction of that would be great as Async >> pipeline doesn't seem to be specific enough. >> >> Martin >> On 22 Oct 2014 14:58, "Miguel de Icaza" <mig...@xamarin.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey, >>> >>> You could start by "faking" the async controllers for now. This would >>> be enough to support WebAPI, even if behind the scenes it is entirely sync. >>> >>> This buys us some time to research the subject. There were a few >>> interesting posts on MSDN, and the blogs about how this works a couple of >>> years ago, so those would be great research material. >>> >>> I can assist (in my copious spare time) with this, as I wrote chunks of >>> the current ASP.NET pipeline with Gonzalo. >>> >>> Miguel >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Martin Thwaites < >>> monofo...@my2cents.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'm still working through implementing methods to mvc/webapi, however, >>>> I've found that the newer versions of WebApi are reliant on async >>>> controllers. >>>> >>>> Now, my perception is that this means that the note on the mono >>>> compatibility page around the Async Pipeline needs to be implemented for >>>> that to work. First, please let me know if I've misunderstood. >>>> >>>> If I take this on, I'm going to need some help to implement it. I see >>>> 2 options, first, someone helps me out with some resources that I can use >>>> to devise a way to do it, articles on the process, examples of where it >>>> might be implemented in the current codebase for other things, etc. >>>> Second, we enlist the help of someone who is more equipped. >>>> >>>> I believe that there are quite a few people who are interested in >>>> getting this implemented, and therefore I have an idea that we could >>>> potentially crowd fund the money to pay a contractor to potentially do it. >>>> My hope would be that with a financial incentive, someone within Xamarin >>>> may be willing to put forward their spare time to do it. This would likely >>>> give us a better chance of getting it merged due to them already being used >>>> Miguel's (understandably high) standards and the processes involved in >>>> contributing. >>>> >>>> So, is there anybody else who would be willing to donate to this (I'm >>>> thinking something like a kickstarter campaign so that people can get their >>>> money back if it doesn't go ahead). >>>> >>>> Also, does anyone who has an idea of how it would be done have any idea >>>> what sort of effort we would be looking at? >>>> >>>> Alternatively, can someone give me an idea of where to start with >>>> implementing it? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list >>>> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com >>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list >>>> >>>> >>> >
_______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list