[erlang-questions] Erlang Web Libraries & Frameworks

Sam Elliott <>
Thu Aug 11 11:55:47 CEST 2011


On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Joe Armstrong <> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Sam Elliott <> wrote:
>> Hi erlang-questions,
>>
>> Recently I needed to compare a few Erlang web libraries and frameworks
>> for a friend who was writing a simple internal API endpoint. He
>> suggested I should publish the rundown for others, and I thought I'd
>> also circulate it here. I'm relatively new to Erlang, so I have
>> probably missed a few libraries.
>>
>> I'll try to keep it updated as people send me information, so don't
>> hesitate to contact me if i've got something wrong.
>>
>> The article: http://lenary.co.uk/erlang/2011/08/erlang-web-libraries/
>>
>> What are your thoughts?
>
> This is great. In addition to your summaries (which are excellent) I'd
> like to see
> a simple cross-framework API. Is what your friend is doing?

Originally my idea was just to provide a rundown so that it makes it
easier to choose the correct framework for the job (which is all my
friend wanted too), however, your idea for an adapter doesn't sound
bad at all. I'm about to say more in reply to Loïc's email.

> For example, If I start off by using yaws and then change my mind
> later and decide to use mochiweb
> I'd like this to have minimal impact on my code. It should be a simple
> as changing the name of
> an interface module. (( ie a GoF adapter pattern ))
>
> To use yaws I'd like to write:
>
>    -define(?ADAPTOR, yaws_adapter).
>
>    -include("adaptor.hrl").
>
>    -import(?ADAPTOR, [my_callback/1, reply/1, start_web_server/0]).
>
>    start() ->
>           ?ADAPTER:start_web_server(),
>           ?ADAPTER:my_callback(fun my_handler/1).
>
>    my_handler(X) when is_record(X,'GET') ->
>           ...
>           ?ADAPTER:reply(#'RELY'{type=html, data=Binary})
>
>
> If I wanted to use mochiweb I'd just have to change the module name of
> the adaptor.
> (this was the original reason for the import declaration in Erlang -
> to make changing the
> implementation of a feature simple :-)
>
> Exactly which routines the adapter would export and the records in
> the include file would need a little thought - but handling
> HTTP GET, POST, PUT, DELETE requests should be easy enough
>
> If all suppliers of web- frameworks could adopt a common adapter
> pattern - it would make
> life a lot easier. I realize that this would not allow us to use some
> of the finer facilities
> offered by an individual web-server, but it would be very useful for the simple
> cases of serving up files etc.
>
> One could have a common API then choose the implementation depending upon
> the requirements of the application.
>
>  /Joe
>
>>
>> Sam
>>
>> --
>> Sam Elliott
>> 
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> 
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list