[erlang-questions] Two beautiful programs - or web programming made easy

Edmond Begumisa <>
Sat Feb 12 21:03:03 CET 2011


On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 06:10:55 +1100, Jerome Martin  
<> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Masklinn <> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-02-12, at 15:34 , Marc Worrell wrote:
>> >
>> > By the way, websockets is not broken. Some proxies are broken.
>> If these proxies being broken create a *security issue* with using
>> websockets, then websockets themselves are broken.
>>
>
> This must be one of the most nonsensical sentence I have read since a  
> long
> time from someone supposedly mastering basic logic. Nice one.
>
>

Sounded like circular logic, but I _kind of_ see what he was trying to say  
;)

Browsers, much like OSs, are in the unfortunate position of having to be  
careful what they introduce coz of the impact on other-people's faulty  
code. Too careful in the websockets case. Web developers have been  
suffering from the uni-directional issue for too long. It's not a minor  
limitation, it's major. Broken proxies just need to be fixed and not pass  
the blame.
	
I've waited in vain for the Mozilla Framework (and hence Firefox) to  
support websockets. The debate reminds me of Linus rather rudely  
complaining about the undue status given to fixing "security" bugs over  
"normal" bugs...

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/701694/focus=706950

The solution might be for web-developers to move away from browsers and  
handle their own security.

- Edmond -
	
-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list