Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.115 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.77; '*S*': 0.00; "ain't": 0.09; 'implements': 0.09; 'logic': 0.09; 'responsive': 0.09; 'api': 0.11; 'gui': 0.12; '"web': 0.16; '(last': 0.16; '80s': 0.16; 'efficiency.': 0.16; 'gonna': 0.16; 'rdbms': 0.16; 'subject:GUI': 0.16; 'subject:library': 0.16; 'workflows': 0.16; 'years)': 0.16; 'library': 0.18; 'example': 0.22; 'programming': 0.22; 'rules': 0.22; 'separate': 0.22; 'to:name:python-list@python.org': 0.22; 'received:65.55.116': 0.24; '+0200': 0.26; 'distribute': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'idea': 0.28; 'skip:- 40': 0.29; 'database,': 0.30; 'url:mailman': 0.30; 'layer': 0.31; 'this.': 0.32; 'run': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; 'entirely': 0.33; 'date:': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; 'basic': 0.35; 'possible.': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'dates': 0.36; 'url:listinfo': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'example,': 0.37; 'application': 0.37; 'email addr:python.org': 0.37; 'performance': 0.37; 'server': 0.38; 'connections': 0.38; 'question,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'recent': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'subject:': 0.39; 'expensive': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'url:mail': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'future': 0.60; 'course.': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'today,': 0.61; 'skip:* 10': 0.61; 're:': 0.63; 'provide': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'email name:python-list': 0.65; 'size.': 0.65; 'due': 0.66; 'side': 0.67; 'between': 0.67; 'optimized': 0.68; 'fact,': 0.69; 'business': 0.70; 'computers': 0.72; 'obvious': 0.74; 'asynchronous': 0.84; 'centralise': 0.84; 'production,': 0.84; 'controller': 0.91; 'besides,': 0.93; '2013': 0.98 X-TMN: [0q8heBrIyFFQ44SVkJfkjhvGnTi6ENgs] X-Originating-Email: [carlosnepomuceno@outlook.com] From: Carlos Nepomuceno To: "python-list@python.org" Subject: RE: Future standard GUI library Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 00:17:13 +0300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20130528192655.08861babbd86e890634e6d90@gmx.net> References: , <20130522154233.fe5263cb231c375fc60c7c9b@gmx.net>, , <20130523174145.22a6c46f586b0a1f656d2412@gmx.net>, , <20130526194310.9cdb1be80b42c7fdf0ba502f@gmx.net>, , <20130528192655.08861babbd86e890634e6d90@gmx.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 May 2013 21:17:13.0885 (UTC) FILETIME=[B9401CD0:01CE5BE8] X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 55 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1369775836 news.xs4all.nl 15933 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:42635 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:46343 ----------------------------------------=0A= > From: feliphil@gmx.net=0A= > Subject: Re: Future standard GUI library=0A= > Date: Tue=2C 28 May 2013 19:26:55 +0200=0A= > To: python-list@python.org=0A= >=0A= >> Please give me an example of a "suitable transport layer for a RPC=0A= >> protocol".=0A= >=0A= > I won't give you an example=2C but just some very basic criteria:=0A= >=0A= > - It must be very efficient for very small "datagrams"=0A= =0A= Interoperability is much more expensive than efficiency. That's why you won= 't get the most optimized protocol for speed or size.=0A= =0A= > - It must provide connections=0A= =0A= What do you mean?=0A= =0A= > - For asynchronous programming it must provide for callbacks=0A= > No RPC-over-HTTP protocol that I know of does this.=0A= =0A= XHR implements asynchronous callbacks over HTTP.=0A= =0A= > Besides=2C no one needs RPC just to logically separate GUI and=0A= > application layer. And between application logic and database=2C you use= =0A= > the native database API for the RDBMS in question=2C of course.=0A= >=0A= > The whole idea to centralise application logic (and even the GUI with=0A= > "web applications") is backwards=2C it dates from the 70s/early 80s when= =0A= > desktop computers weren't able to run application logic. Today=2C to make= =0A= > an application responsive (minimise latencies and maximise throughput)=2C= =0A= > it's just obvious to *de*-centralise as much as possible. In fact=2C=0A= > if Postgres-R was available for production=2C you could even distribute= =0A= > the persistence and run an entirely "serverless" application.=0A= =0A= "web applications" is so nowadays! All of my recent software development pr= ojects (last 10 years) focus on business processes integration.=0A= In all of them the BLL (Business Logic Layer)=2C or "application logic"=2C = is run on server side (as a controller in MVC) due to security and performa= nce reasons.=0A= None of my clients want their business rules and internal workflows exposed= =2C so the old ways of the 70/80's ain't gonna change.=0A= =0A= > Sincerely=2C=0A= >=0A= > Wolfgang=0A= > --=0A= > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list =