1. 2
    oomkiller avatar oomkiller 3 years ago | link | on: Shen Under BSD

    Why would someone use a language in 2014 with such a restrictive license? Is it magic or something?

    1. zedoary avatar zedoary 3 years ago | link

      [Comment removed by author]

      1. 2
        oomkiller avatar oomkiller 3 years ago | link

        My question wasn’t rhetorical. I am wondering what’s special about this language, and why I would use it over anything else (especially considering the weird license).

      2. 3
        banjiewen avatar banjiewen 3 years ago | link

        That’s of the point of the submission. The wacky license has been a barrier to adoption (see decent HN discussion here), and the author is finally considering FOSS.

        1. 1
          technomancy avatar technomancy 3 years ago | link

          Right; as far as I can tell, no one is using it with the current license, despite it having a fairly interesting type system.

      1. 1
        oomkiller avatar oomkiller 5 years ago | link | on: tengine - TaoBao's fork of nginx

        I wonder why they chose to fully fork it instead of contributing back to nginx? Is the project difficult to contribute to for some reason? I’d love to be able to add modules dynamically without totally recompiling.

        1. 1
          oomkiller avatar oomkiller 5 years ago | link | on: Querying PostgreSQL datatypes in ActiveRecord with postgres_ext

          It’s cool to see this is possible now, but can anyone think of a better API than dropping down to arel_table? I’d rather write the SQL by hand honestly.

          1. 1
            rfw avatar rfw 5 years ago | link | on: Message based web applications

            Isn’t this pretty much just Erlang but with a clusterfuck of languages?

            1. 1
              mikeg avatar mikeg 5 years ago | link

              The author says “Message based systems have been around forever. The way I’m applying the concept is what’s new and interesting (at least to me).” But I’m also lost on exactly what the new ideas are.

              It sounds like the author is wishing for a “Staged Event Driven Architecture” http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~mdw/proj/seda/ — which was a really cool project. I think the SEDA idea has a lot of potential, but unfortunately the developer Matt Welsh, as an academic, was not incentivized to continue development. Matt discuss this problem, in general, here http://matt-welsh.blogspot.com/2012/06/startup-university.html

              I’ll also point out that “If a worker fails, is restarted or killed the messge will be requeued and not lost.” sounds like a bad idea to me. This idea would only make sense if worker failures were unrelated to the message the worker is processing. In all likelihood though, workers fail when they can’t handle the input. In the case of a high-density DoS attack, this will just spread the attack amplifying the damage.

              1. 1
                oomkiller avatar oomkiller 5 years ago | link

                The way JBoss handles this is to send the failed messages to a failed queue where you can do whatever you want with them. You could easily requeue with an incremented fail_count number and just log and drop the message after it fails X amount of times.