BradAndMark |
Edit this page |
2003-08
My friend Chris was talking to a mutual friend Brad about Wheat. Brad looked over the Wheat Wiki and sent the first comments and questions to Chris, who then forwarded them to me. The second message was to both of us. I've decided to answer here.
What follows is a slightly edited form of Brad's original e-mails, followed by my responses (indented). Please feel free to add to the conversation.
I'm reading the AboutWheat page. I don't get the claim "Web sites are programmed either in scripting languages that are fundamentally string processing languages." The lack of an "or" for the "either" is probably the typo that when fixed will address my concern, but in things like DreamWeaver, Java, Flash, are not what I think of as "string processing" languages. Perl started off as a string processing language, but since Perl 5 has had a pretty generic object/class model language.
Where do I go to see a critical consideration of the "why another language" question? What I want is someone to say, "there is no language today in which I can easily solve such and such a user problem", or "I think a dynamic web page that looks like X would be cool, and no language is convenient for expressing that".
Also, I'm seeing lots of talk on language and visual design, but not seeing any discussion of a data model beyond the object model. How do I take my reams of relational database data, and rapidly integrate it into my Wheaties Webpages?
I trust that folks wanted it to be www.wheatfield.org, not www.wheatfarm.org, but that was already taken by a group of Christians in Aurora, Colorado, "encouraging each individual to love and serve God and one another."
Brad
I realize that Mark is coming into the conversation at the point I'm sounding strangely crochety. The context I'd want to create around those remarks is that I think it looks like it will be an interesting project, and my point of view is "if I were to play in this sandbox, what toys would I want to have that I don't yet see?"
I also am looking forward to hearing the sonic (dare I say musical) component of wheat. I'll think about that.
I'm reading through the rest of the wiki, at which point I'll feel more confident about entering into the conversation online.
Brad
My friend Chris was talking to a mutual friend Brad about Wheat. Brad looked over the Wheat Wiki and sent the first comments and questions to Chris, who then forwarded them to me. The second message was to both of us. I've decided to answer here.
What follows is a slightly edited form of Brad's original e-mails, followed by my responses (indented). Please feel free to add to the conversation.
I'm reading the AboutWheat page. I don't get the claim "Web sites are programmed either in scripting languages that are fundamentally string processing languages." The lack of an "or" for the "either" is probably the typo that when fixed will address my concern, but in things like DreamWeaver, Java, Flash, are not what I think of as "string processing" languages. Perl started off as a string processing language, but since Perl 5 has had a pretty generic object/class model language.
Okay, I admit that "fundamentally string processing languages" was a deliberately provocative statement. However, it is certainly that Python is the only language in which one can express an object directly in the syntax. Perl and PHP have extensive built-in operators, conversions, and semantics for numbers, strings, and associative arrays, but not objects. Only Java has an object model that I think one would consider robust and well thought out. -- MarkLentczner, 2003-08-17 (ML1)
Where do I go to see a critical consideration of the "why another language" question? What I want is someone to say, "there is no language today in which I can easily solve such and such a user problem", or "I think a dynamic web page that looks like X would be cool, and no language is convenient for expressing that".
There is no language today in which objects are conceived as the persistent, globally accessible entities that web programming today attempts to model. Web programming is sufficiently different from application programming to warrant a new model: When building applications we expect them to be started at a point in time, read the user's data from some data store into the heap, process it, possibly interacting with the user, write in back and then quit. Heap based objects, or more generally, languages where the unit of operation is on ephemeral, memory based data, works perfectly for applications. When we think of web programming, we are trying to create a view where the user's content is ever present, ever live, and widely accessible. Rather than build this world view up on top of an memory based foundation, Wheat has an object model that can directly support this style of programming. -- ML1
Also, I'm seeing lots of talk on language and visual design, but not seeing any discussion of a data model beyond the object model. How do I take my reams of relational database data, and rapidly integrate it into my Wheaties Webpages?
You mount the databases into the Wheat name space via an appropriate ObjectMedia. The tables appear as objects in the Wheat name space: /brad/musicdb/sonatas. The rows appear as Wheat objects under this: /brad/musicdb/sonatas/2341 (assuming the rows have an integer primary key). If you need write SQL to improve the efficiency, then you do it by extending the table object with methods that run SQL and return Wheat group objects of results.
Yes, I realize that this isn't going to work for Amazon's database of books, or a Fortune 500 company's inventory. But it will work just fine for my Square Dance club's membership list, and a list of a few thousand GeoCaches∞. -- ML1
I trust that folks wanted it to be www.wheatfield.org, not www.wheatfarm.org, but that was already taken by a group of Christians in Aurora, Colorado, "encouraging each individual to love and serve God and one another."
Well yes, I did initially prefer 'field' to 'farm'. And of course, all the plain 'wheat-dot-xxx' names were taken. But, I've grown fond of the folksyness of 'wheatfarm'. It's a bit more people oriented than the others.
Brad
I realize that Mark is coming into the conversation at the point I'm sounding strangely crochety. The context I'd want to create around those remarks is that I think it looks like it will be an interesting project, and my point of view is "if I were to play in this sandbox, what toys would I want to have that I don't yet see?"
Not crochety, just reasonably skeptical. I hope my comments above help, because I've very interested to know what you find missing from the sandbox. -- ML1
I also am looking forward to hearing the sonic (dare I say musical) component of wheat. I'll think about that.
Alas, I haven't done any sound or music programming in years. While the state of sound via web sites is pathetic to say the least, there is certainly immediate possibilities for coding about music in Wheat. [As a total aside, have you heard the radio program American Mavericks about 20th century American composers? They have a great web site at http://www.musicmavericks.org/∞] -- ML1
I'm reading through the rest of the wiki, at which point I'll feel more confident about entering into the conversation online.
Please do. I'd love to have contribute, even your questions are valuable. -- ML.
Brad
There is no comment on this page.
[Display comments/form]
