[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
| Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 14:58:28 -0800 (PST)
| From: bear <bear@xxxxxxxxx>
| On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Chris Hanson wrote:
| >bear wrote:
| >> So to me a scheme URI would be something like
| >> "scheme://R5RS/TinyCLOS/rationals/foo.scm"
| >> and this woud be a key into a small database that mapped
| >> it to a URL giving a web address where it could be downloaded.
| >But why not just use an http: URI to do that? You don't need the
| >small database at all. Something like
| > http://schemers.org/R5RS/TinyCLOS/rationals/foo.scm
| I think that would imply excessive reliance on a single
| site and server. And this is sometimes a problem. Aside
| from the situation becoming such that the entire community
| would be hosed if a single server should go down, it would
| impose a significant burden (and bandwidth costs) on the
| maintainers of that site.
I believe Chris is suggesting multiple sites:
A less idiosyncratic site for SLIB could be
| > The database could be stored on the server instead of having a
| > local copy everywhere.
SLIB maintains a local catalog (database) of named modules on the host
running or compiling Scheme. "(require 'new-catalog)" rebuilds the
catalog; which is also done if the catalog is missing. This approach
works well and runs quickly.
Going out to the web for every module request is a bad idea. Programs
which worked yesterday may fail today if a module has been changed. A
program will fail to run if a server hosting a module it needs is
A library of interest should be downloaded and stored on the local
host, its entries integrated into the catalog on the local machine.
These operations can of course be automated.