Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-04 Thread Nathan Folkman

In a message dated 11/3/02 10:49:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



What was the new chat time on Thursdays? Last stated was 3pm Eastern, but then you asked for any takers at 2pm Eastern. I abstained, and no one else spoke up, so I'm assuming it was finally changed to 3pm Eastern.

  

 I intend to hang out in the chat room all day from now on.

  

 /s.



i'll have to look back at my notes. i think it was 3est.


Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver command style guide (was Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!)

2002-11-04 Thread Zoran Vasiljevic
On Monday 04 November 2002 12:58, you wrote:
> > Is there some reason not to rename the 'nsv_*' commands to correspond to
> > Tcl's 'array' command?  Thus, 'nsv_set' would change to 'ns_array set',
> > so that
> >
> >   ns_array set
> >
> > would correspond to Tcl's
> >
> >   array set
> >
> > and so on.
>
> Again, to remain idiomatic, I think:
>
> nsv_set arrayName elementName value => nsv set arrayName elementName value
> nsv_get arrayName elementName => nsv get arrayName elementName
> [...]
> nsv_array names arrayName => nsv array names arrayName
>

I've reimplemented (and significantly extened) nsv_*
for the Tcl threading extension 2.4 by using Tcl_Obj*
for internal storage. There, I've used tsv::*

  tsv::set arrayName elementName value
  tsv::incr arrayName elementName ?increment?

  etc...

The "tsv" stands for "thread shared variable"
This is another possibility, since AOLserver
has dumped the pre8 Tcl version.

Zoran



[AOLSERVER] AOLserver command style guide (was Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!)

2002-11-04 Thread Dossy
On 2002.11.03, Scott Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I Agree. We'll do the 3.5 docs first as-is. I think at some point we
> should bite the bullet and rename commands like
>
>ns_returnadminnotice
>
> to be
>
>ns_return adminnotice
>
> and maintain that consistency throughout the server and modules.
> Backward compatibility would be kept for some period of time.

Agreed.  This is Tcl's idiomatic way of doing things, which I think
would be good to remain consistent within AOLserver.

> Is there some reason not to rename the 'nsv_*' commands to correspond to
> Tcl's 'array' command?  Thus, 'nsv_set' would change to 'ns_array set',
> so that
>
>   ns_array set
>
> would correspond to Tcl's
>
>   array set
>
> and so on.

Again, to remain idiomatic, I think:

nsv_set arrayName elementName value => nsv set arrayName elementName value
nsv_get arrayName elementName => nsv get arrayName elementName
[...]
nsv_array names arrayName => nsv array names arrayName

That's just my two cents, of course.

-- Dossy

--
Dossy Shiobara   mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)



Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Scott Goodwin
Title: Message



What was 
the new chat time on Thursdays? Last stated was 3pm Eastern, but then you asked 
for any takers at 2pm Eastern. I abstained, and no one else spoke up, so I'm 
assuming it was finally changed to 3pm Eastern.
 
I intend to 
hang out in the chat room all day from now on.
 
/s.

  
  -Original Message-From: AOLserver 
  Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nathan 
  FolkmanSent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:05 PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for 
  AOLserver Documentation!In a message dated 
  11/3/02 7:52:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  After reviewing this, I now see what you're saying. The 
problem is thatthe second part of some command names should really have 
been thesubcommand name.For example:   
ns_returnadminnoticeshould really have been:   
ns_return adminnoticeIn the same way,   
ns_sockopenshould really be   ns_sock 
openWere this the case, it would be obvious to look up 'man 
ns_sock' and'man ns_return'. In these cases, I take back what I said -- 
I supposethey should be on the same man page.Thus, it appears 
the AOLserver Tcl Dev Guide is inconsistent --ns_sockopen, ns_socklisten 
and the other ns_sock* command should havebeen on the same page 
together, like ns_return*, but they aren't. Maybethat's because the 
functionality or passed args are essentially the samefor ns_return*, but 
different for ns_sock*./s.Ironically Jim and I were just 
  discussing changing the nsv_* commands to be something like ns_svar 
  . Keeping the current nsv_* commands for backward compatibility of 
  course! ;-) I think we should concentrate on documenting the files as they 
  exist in $TOP/aolserver/doc and can revisit single vs. multiple commands per 
  file when we turn our attention towards the 4.0 documentation work.- 
  n 
  


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Scott Goodwin
Title: Message



I Agree. 
We'll do the 3.5 docs first as-is. I think at some point 
we should bite the bullet and rename commands like
 
   ns_returnadminnotice
 
to 
be
 
   ns_return adminnotice
 
and 
maintain that consistency throughout the server and modules. Backward compatibility 
would be kept for some period of time.
 
 
Is there 
some reason not to rename the 'nsv_*' 
commands to correspond to Tcl's 'array' command?  Thus, 
'nsv_set' would change to 'ns_array set', so 
that
 
  
ns_array set
 
would 
correspond to Tcl's
 
  
array set
 
and so 
on.
 
Those 
familiar with Tcl's array command would then intuitively know how to use the 
nsv_* / ns_array * commands.
 
It might 
not be a perfect one-to-one correspondence, but it should come pretty 
close.
 
 
/s.
 
 

  
  -Original Message-From: AOLserver 
  Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nathan 
  FolkmanSent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 9:05 PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for 
  AOLserver Documentation!In a message dated 
  11/3/02 7:52:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  After reviewing this, I now see what you're saying. The 
problem is thatthe second part of some command names should really have 
been thesubcommand name.For example:   
ns_returnadminnoticeshould really have been:   
ns_return adminnoticeIn the same way,   
ns_sockopenshould really be   ns_sock 
openWere this the case, it would be obvious to look up 'man 
ns_sock' and'man ns_return'. In these cases, I take back what I said -- 
I supposethey should be on the same man page.Thus, it appears 
the AOLserver Tcl Dev Guide is inconsistent --ns_sockopen, ns_socklisten 
and the other ns_sock* command should havebeen on the same page 
together, like ns_return*, but they aren't. Maybethat's because the 
functionality or passed args are essentially the samefor ns_return*, but 
different for ns_sock*./s.Ironically Jim and I were just 
  discussing changing the nsv_* commands to be something like ns_svar 
  . Keeping the current nsv_* commands for backward compatibility of 
  course! ;-) I think we should concentrate on documenting the files as they 
  exist in $TOP/aolserver/doc and can revisit single vs. multiple commands per 
  file when we turn our attention towards the 4.0 documentation work.- 
  n 
  


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Nathan Folkman

In a message dated 11/3/02 7:52:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


After reviewing this, I now see what you're saying. The problem is that
the second part of some command names should really have been the
subcommand name.

For example:

   ns_returnadminnotice

should really have been:

   ns_return adminnotice


In the same way,

   ns_sockopen

should really be

   ns_sock open


Were this the case, it would be obvious to look up 'man ns_sock' and
'man ns_return'. In these cases, I take back what I said -- I suppose
they should be on the same man page.

Thus, it appears the AOLserver Tcl Dev Guide is inconsistent --
ns_sockopen, ns_socklisten and the other ns_sock* command should have
been on the same page together, like ns_return*, but they aren't. Maybe
that's because the functionality or passed args are essentially the same
for ns_return*, but different for ns_sock*.


/s.


Ironically Jim and I were just discussing changing the nsv_* commands to be something like ns_svar . Keeping the current nsv_* commands for backward compatibility of course! ;-) I think we should concentrate on documenting the files as they exist in $TOP/aolserver/doc and can revisit single vs. multiple commands per file when we turn our attention towards the 4.0 documentation work.

- n


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Scott Goodwin
> I find, for example, that the traditional AOLserver documentation
including all
> variants of ns_return on a single page helps me to better understand
the range
> of responses available.


After reviewing this, I now see what you're saying. The problem is that
the second part of some command names should really have been the
subcommand name.

For example:

   ns_returnadminnotice

should really have been:

   ns_return adminnotice


In the same way,

   ns_sockopen

should really be

   ns_sock open


Were this the case, it would be obvious to look up 'man ns_sock' and
'man ns_return'. In these cases, I take back what I said -- I suppose
they should be on the same man page.

Thus, it appears the AOLserver Tcl Dev Guide is inconsistent --
ns_sockopen, ns_socklisten and the other ns_sock* command should have
been on the same page together, like ns_return*, but they aren't. Maybe
that's because the functionality or passed args are essentially the same
for ns_return*, but different for ns_sock*.


/s.



Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Peter M. Jansson
On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 02:33 PM, Scott Goodwin wrote:


Documenting multiple commands on the same page ... will confuse the
readers


I disagree; I find, for example, that the traditional AOLserver
documentation including all variants of ns_return on a single page helps
me to better understand the range of responses available.



Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Peter M. Jansson
On Sunday, November 3, 2002, at 02:09 PM, Scott Goodwin wrote:


 It breaks the unix standard of one command per man page


I think Tcl commands are more akin to library calls than shell commands,
and there is no standard for a single library call per man page.  For
examples, look at the documentation for strcpy and friends, or malloc and
friends, which have coalesced a number of closely-related calls into a
single page in every version of Unix I've used since WiCAT Unix (a System
III derivative) in 1983.



Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Nathan Folkman

In a message dated 11/3/02 3:26:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Right.  The traditional use of man pages is to type in:

$ man 

Such as "man accept" or "man ls" ... and have the accompanying or
related call names in the "SEE ALSO" section.

I agree with Scott here.

-- Dossy

I believe both approaches are valid, take the man page for strstr as an example. 

- n


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Dossy
On 2002.11.03, Scott Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you mean that all the ns_sock* commands are to be documented under
> one ns_sock.n man page, I have to disagree. It breaks the unix standard
> of one command per man page. I wouldn't know to look in ns_sock.n for
> ns_sockopen; the user should not need to know what file a command is
> defined in so they can look up the command. And when I want to see how
> ns_sockopen works, I don't want ns_socklisten and the others on the same
> page. I'd rather have the other related commands be in the "See Also"
> section.
>
> I believe strongly that we should have one man page per API call, and
> not one man page per file name.

Right.  The traditional use of man pages is to type in:

$ man 

Such as "man accept" or "man ls" ... and have the accompanying or
related call names in the "SEE ALSO" section.

I agree with Scott here.

-- Dossy

--
Dossy Shiobara   mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)



Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Scott Goodwin
Title: Message



Not 
completely true.
 
The Tcl 
commands are documented on separate man pages -- the 'for' and 'foreach' Tcl 
commands are on their own separate pages, and the See Also leads you to the 
other commands.
 
The Tcl C 
API is a different story -- in this case, the multiple C API functions 
are documented on the same page. I personally have a difficult time 
reading through them.
 
I think it will be simpler and easier to write and read the 
Tcl API commands if we have each command documented separately on its own 
man page.
 
Documenting 
multiple commands on the same page will make the man pages that much longer to 
scroll through, especially if we have good example code on them, and 
will confuse the readers, especially people new to AOLserver. Even 
if the confusion is relatively minor, if it can be avoided, I think it should 
be.
 
Finally, if 
you look at the AOLserver 3.0 Tcl Dev Guide, each command has its own, 
separate page that is different for each command (ns_sockopen and 
ns_socklisten are not the same, repeated page).
 
These are 
the reasons I believe we should stick with the unix philosophy of "one man page 
for one command", and continue to follow the way the 3.0 Tcl Dev Guide is done 
and Tcl commands are done.
 
/s.
 
 
 
 

  
  -Original Message-From: AOLserver 
  Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jim 
  DavidsonSent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 1:13 PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for 
  AOLserver Documentation!In a message dated 
  11/3/02 2:09:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  If you mean that all the ns_sock* commands are to be documented under 
one ns_sock.n man page, I have to disagree. It breaks the unix standard of 
one command per man page. I wouldn't know to look in ns_sock.n for 
ns_sockopen; the user should not need to know what file a command is defined 
in so they can look up the command. And when I want to see how 
ns_sockopen works, I don't want ns_socklisten and the others on the same 
page. I'd rather have the other related commands be in the "See Also" 
section. I believe strongly that we should have one man page per 
API call, and not one man page per file name. Hi,The 
  AOLserver doc install, like Tcl, includes a mkLinks script which links up all 
  the pages.  This means "man ns_sockopen", "man ns_sockaccept", etc. 
  return the same page.-Jim


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Jim Davidson

In a message dated 11/3/02 2:09:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



If you mean that all the ns_sock* commands are to be documented under one ns_sock.n man page, I have to disagree. It breaks the unix standard of one command per man page. I wouldn't know to look in ns_sock.n for ns_sockopen; the user should not need to know what file a command is defined in so they can look up the command. And when I want to see how ns_sockopen works, I don't want ns_socklisten and the others on the same page. I'd rather have the other related commands be in the "See Also" section.

  

 I believe strongly that we should have one man page per API call, and not one man page per file name. 




Hi,
The AOLserver doc install, like Tcl, includes a mkLinks script which links up all the pages.   This means "man ns_sockopen", "man ns_sockaccept", etc. return the same page.
-Jim


Re: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-03 Thread Scott Goodwin
Title: Message



 
If you mean 
that all the ns_sock* commands are to be documented under one ns_sock.n man 
page, I have to disagree. It breaks the unix standard of one command per man 
page. I wouldn't know to look in ns_sock.n for ns_sockopen; the user should not 
need to know what file a command is defined in so they can look up the 
command. And when I want to see how ns_sockopen works, I don't want 
ns_socklisten and the others on the same page. I'd rather have the other related 
commands be in the "See Also" section.
 
I believe 
strongly that we should have one man page per API call, and not one man page per 
file name. 
 
/s.
 
 

  
  -Original Message-From: AOLserver 
  Discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nathan 
  FolkmanSent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 9:03 PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [AOLSERVER] Sign Up for 
  AOLserver Documentation!To clarify, please sign up 
  by file name instead of by API name. A number of the man pages contain 
  multiple API's - example: $TOP/aolserver/doc/ns_sock.n. Also, please make sure 
  you are working from the aolserver_v35_bp branch. We need to get the docs 
  completed for 3.5, then we will tackle 4.0.To find out what still 
  needs to be documented:1. Check out the 3.5 code: cvs co 
  -raolserver_v35_bp aolserver2. Take a look in $TOP/aolserver/doc for man 
  page files3. Check the "Tasks" area on SourceForge to see what's already 
  been taken4. Add a new task for the man page file, or send email to 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the name of the file and we'll add 
  it for youLet me know if there are any questions. Thanks!- 
  n


[AOLSERVER] Sign Up for AOLserver Documentation!

2002-11-02 Thread Nathan Folkman
To clarify, please sign up by file name instead of by API name. A number of the man pages contain multiple API's - example: $TOP/aolserver/doc/ns_sock.n. Also, please make sure you are working from the aolserver_v35_bp branch. We need to get the docs completed for 3.5, then we will tackle 4.0.

To find out what still needs to be documented:

1. Check out the 3.5 code: cvs co -raolserver_v35_bp aolserver
2. Take a look in $TOP/aolserver/doc for man page files
3. Check the "Tasks" area on SourceForge to see what's already been taken
4. Add a new task for the man page file, or send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the name of the file and we'll add it for you

Let me know if there are any questions. Thanks!

- n