I need to write a logic engine for an application. Essentially, this thing is going to be fed a bunch of data in an XML file, and it then crunches that data and produces an XML file as its result.
The trick is that this engine will need to run on a server (probably Windows, and probably as a background service) AND it will need to on mobile devices - iOS and Android, primarily.
The logic isn't that awfully difficult or complex. On the mobile devices, the idea is to give researchers quick-and-dirty access to the engine for very tiny data sets. The server "version" will do exactly the same work, but do it on huge data sets.
The GUI will be abstracted from this logic engine.
I should point out that the "mobile version" should be able to work offline - meaning that whatever I choose to implement this logic engine in, it needs to run natively on the devices. THAT said, it's perfectly fine for it to run in the mobile device's local Web browser in a locally-stored file. For example, I'd originally considered JavaScript for this - except I don't think there's a way to have JavaScript running in a multi-threaded service on the server side of things.
Is there a single language that offers to do this? With a minimum of re-coding between platforms?
You can use Rhino to execute JavaScript from inside a Java server/servlet. I'm not sure how parallel/threaded the engine is. You can also look into hosting Google V8, which probably will be higher performance/more scalable.
I don't think you can do all of this (you probably can, but it wouldn't be very pretty) in one language.
Java (or another JVM language like Scala, Clojure or Groovy) is the closest you can do: it's the single platform that allows compiled code to be run unchanged on the largest range of platforms.
However I'm not sure how good Java support is on iOS - this might be the tricky one. But this is going to be a problem in any case: Apple don't seem particularly keen on encouraging anything other than their own tools.
Perhaps the best strategy is to write in Java (which will cover your servers and 95% of your client platforms) and then have a small client side portion that you can quickly port for special cases like iOS.
Related
I know this sounds a little bizarre, but there is a very simple application I want to write, a sort of unique image viewer, which requires some interactivity with the host system at the user level. Simplicity when developing is a must as this is a very small side project. The project does require some amount of graphical work and quite a bit of mouse based interactivity (as well as some keyboard shortcuts), but quite frankly, I don't want to dig my hands into OGL for something this small. I looked at the available options, and I think I've narrowed it down to two main choices: Webkit (through either QtWebkit or WebkitGtk), and the language Processing.
Since I haven't actually used Processing but I do have some amount of HTML5 canvas and Javascript experience, I am somewhat tempted to using a Webkit based solution. There are however, several concerns I have.
How is Webkit's support for canvas, specifically for more graphically intensive processes?
I've heard that bridging is handled better in QtWebkit than WebkitGtk. Is this still true?
To what degree can bridging actually do? Can a Webkit based application do everything that an application which interacts with the files on the system needs?
Looking at Processing, there are similarly, a couple things I'm wondering.
Processing is known for its graphical capabilities, but how capable is it for writing a general everyday desktop application?
There are many sources that link Processing to Java, both in lineage as well as in distributing applications over the web (ie: JApplets). Is the "Application Export" similarly closely integrated with Java?
As for directly comparing the two, the main concern I do have is the overhead of each. I want the application to start up as snappy as possible, and I know that Java has a bit of an overhead regarding start up because it first has to start up the interpreter. How do Processing and QtWebkit/WebkitGtk compare for start up?
Note that I am targeting the Linux platform only.
Thanks!
It's difficult to give a specific answer, because you're actually asking a few different kind of questions - and some of them you could be more precise.
Processing is a subset or child of java - it's really "just" a java framework with an free ide that hides the messy setup work of building an applet, so that a user can dive in and write something quickly without getting bogged down in widgets and ui, etc. So processing can exist by itself and the end user needs to know nothing of Java (except syntax - processing is java, so the user must learn java syntax).
But a programmer who already knows java can exploit the fun quick nature of processing and then leverage their normal java experience for whatever else is needed - everything of java is in processing, just a maybe slightly hidden (but only at first) It's also possible to import the processing.jars into an existing java program and use them there. See http://processing.org/learning/eclipse/ form more information.
"how capable is it for writing a general everyday desktop application?" - Not particularly on it's own (it's not made to be), but some things are possible and easy (i.e. file saving & loading, non-standard gui, etc.), and in some ways it's similar to old school actionscript or lingo. There is a library called controlP5 that makes gui stuff a bit easier.
Webkit is another kettle of fish, especially if you aren't making a web-based thing (it sounds like you're thinking on using the webkit libraries as part of a larger program. I'll admit I don't have the dev expertise with those specific libraries to give you the answer you really want, but I'm pretty certain that unless you have programming experience beyond html5/javascript you'll probably get going much faster with processing.
Good luck with whichever path you choose!
I am going to implement Lucene search into my project and I want to make a best start.
So I consider between 3 versions of Lucene (Java/C#.Net/C++) which is the best version upon these criterias :
1.performance
2.easy to implement
3.plenty of documents ?
Assume the system is Window server, and I ask it for a long-term use.
Thanks
I would say Java. Lucene was initially developed in Java and I would think there are bigger community, more documentation and bigger deployments using Java.
Granted, Windows is not usually considered as primary platform for deploying Java services but it still would work with flying colors. Many people using Windows for Java development and even deployment so I don't expect any major issues.
Unless you've got a specific feature you need, I would look at best being:
a) Whatever platform you are developing the program in -- there are lots of advantages to not having to switch tools/contexts/platforms to muck around with the search internals.
b) Whatever platform your ops guys want to deal with -- I know lots of windows ops guys hate dealing with java as it is a strange foreign language. For example.
c) All of the above being equal, Java is the real flagship lucene project that everyone else is keeping up with with and that has the most tools & resources. It is the way to go if you don't have any reason not to use java. Solr is another advantage here -- you can pretty easily use a pre-wrapped fully functional lucene http server.
In any case, keep in mind that at least theoretically any lucene index written on one platform is readable by others so you don't necessarily have to fully commit to a single platform.
I'm trying to understand if it is worth the pain to learn XUL more thoroughly.
If you have experience with a moderately complex project (like an independent application rather than a Firefox extension), can you tell me what your experience has been like?
I am particularly worried for feature which are not supported by the XUL framework natively. There are two possibilities: either create more XPCOM components, or using external tools. The latter approach is not completely satisfactory, as interprocess communication seems somehow lacking in XUL.
On the other hand, I have no knowledge of C++. How difficult would it be for a first time learner to wrap an existing library in XPCOM dressing?
I have not written any XPCOM in my three years of developing XUL applications. It does seem intimidating. So far, though, I haven't had a good reason to create any XPCOM. I do use some external tools - for reporting, working with mobile devices, etc. I eventually figured out that you can at least get the STDOUT return value from a process that runs (at least on Windows, it seems that this particular feature might not be consistent across platforms). That allowed me to have at least a single return value, which allowed me to implement error handling.
I think that you will find that you can do quite a bit without touching XPCOM. However, everything is not polished and easy, and there is not a large, helpful, developer community/ not much developer support, so it can be a frustrating learning experience.
If this is a large application, or an application that you might be adding other developers too, you may wish to consider choosing a more supported development platform.
I'm playing WoW for about 2 years and I was quite curious about Lua which is used to write addons. Since what I've read so far about Lua was "fast", "light" and "this is great", I was wondering how and when to use it.
What is the typical situation where you will need to embed a script language like Lua in a system ?
When you need end users to be able to define/change the system without requiring the system to rewritten. It's used in games to allow extensions or to allow the main game engine to remain unchanged, while allow content to be changed.
Embedded scripting languages work well for storing configuration information as well. Last I checked, the Mozilla family all use JavaScript for their config information.
Next up, they are great for developing plugins. You can create a custom API to expose to the plugin developers, and the plugin developers gain a lot of freedom from having an entire language to work with.
Another is when flat files aren't expressive enough. If you want to write data driven apps where behavior is parameterized, you'll get really tired of long strings of conditionals testing for config combinations. When this happens, you're better off writing the rules AND their evaluation into your config.
This topic gets some coverage in the book Pragramtic Programmer.
Lua is:
Lightweight
Easy to integrate, even in an asynchronized environment such as a game
Easy to learn for non-programmer staff such as integrators, designers and artists
Since games usually require all those qualities, Lua is mostly used there. Other sitation could be any application that needs some scripting functionality, but developers often opt for a little more heavy weight solution such as .Net or python.
In addition to the scripting and configurability cases mentioned, I would simply state that Lua+C (or Lua+C++) is a perfect match for any software development. It allows one to make an engine/usage interface where engine is done in C/C++ and the behaviour or customization done in Lua.
OS X Cocoa has Objective-C (C and Smalltalk amalgam, where language changes by the line). I find Lua+C similar, only the language changes by a source file, which to me is a better abstraction.
The reasons why you would not want to use Lua are also noteworthy. Because it hardly has a good debugger. Then again, people hardly seem to need one either. :)
a scripting language like Lua can also be used if you have to change code (with immediate effect) while the application is running. one may not see this in wow, because as far as i remember the code is loaded at the start (and not rechecked and reloaded while running).
but think of another example: webserver and scripting language - (thankfully) you can change your php code without having to recompile apache or restart apache.
steve yegge did that thing for his own mmorpg engine powering wyvern, using jython or rhino and javascript (can't remember). he wrote the core engine in java, but the program logic in python/javascript.
the effect of this is:
he doesn't have to restart the core engine when changing the scripts, because that would disconnect all the players
he can let others do the simpler programming like defining new items and monsters without exposing all the critical code to them
sandboxing: if an error happens inside the script, you may be able to handle it gracefully without endangering the surrounding application
Rapid development for application with real-time constraints. Computer games are one of these ;-)
It's a valid solution if you want to allow third parties to develop plug-ins or mods for your software.
You could implement an API in whatever language you are using, but a script language like LUA tends to be more simple and accessible for casual developers.
In addition to all the excellent reasons mentioned by others, Embedding Lua in C is very helpful when you need to manipulate text, work with files, or just need a higher level language. Lua has lots of nifty feature (Tables, functions are first class values, lots of other good stuff). Also, while lua isn't as fast as C or C++, it's pretty quick for an interpreted language.
I am developing a cocoa application that will be making heavy use of both web services and a standard dbms (most likely MySQL) and I am wondering if anyone has a good option for a database library or ORM solution they have used. CoreData is not an option due to the need to support a standard DBMS and to be able to modify the data outside of the normal application operation.
I have found a number of possible options from new open source libraries:
http://github.com/aptiva/activerecord/tree/master
To writing my own wrapper for the C MySQL api.
Any advice is welcome,
Thanks!
Paul
We faced a similar question when we first started work on Checkout, our solution was to code the entire app in Python, using PyObjC. Checkout 1 had an sqlite backend, Checkout 2 has a postgres backend.
There are a couple of really mature and powerful ORMs on the Pyton side, such as SQLObject, which is pretty simple to work with (we used it for Checkout 1.0) and SQLAlchemy, which is more powerful but a bit harder to wrap your brain around (we used it for Checkout 2.0).
One approach you could evaluate, is building the application in Objective-C, but writing the data model and database connectivity/adminstration code in Python. You can use PyObjC to create a plugin bundle from this code, that you then load into your app That's more or less the approach we took for Checkout Server, which uses a Foundation command-line tool to administer a postgres server and the databases in it, this CLI tool in turn loads in a Python plugin bundle that has all of the actual database code in it. End-users mostly interact with the database through a System Preferences pane, that has no clue what the database looks like, but instead uses the command-line tool to interact with it.
Loading a plugin is simple:
NSBundle *pluginBundle = [NSBundle bundleWithPath:pluginPath];
[pluginBundle load];
You will probably need to create .h files for the classes in your bundle that you want to have access to from your Obj-C code.
You might also want to check out the BaseTen framework. It is a Core Data-like framework (in fact, it can import Core Data models), but works with PostgreSQL (though not MySQL, as far as I know). It includes some very nice features such as schema discovery at run time. It also includes an NSArrayController subclass that automatically handles locking and synchronizing across multiple users, so you can continue to make use of Apples Key-value Binding in your UI.
I have personal experience with this particular problem. I even started down the road of writing my own wrapper for the C MySQL API.
The eventual conclusion was: Don't!
The solution that worked in my case was to communicate with the MySQL server via PHP. If you are familiar with web services, chances are that you know about PHP, so I don't won't go into loads of detail about that.
To read from the database:
The cocoa app sends a request for a URL on the server: http://theserver.com/app/get_values.php
The get_values.php script handles the database query, and returns the data in xml format
The cocoa app loads and parses the xml
To write to the database:
The cocoa app sends a more complex request to the server: http://theserver.com/app/put_values.php?name="john doe"&age=21&address=...
The put_values.php script parses the input and writes to the database
The beauty of this solution is that PHP is great for working with MySQL, and cocoa has some handy built-in classes for working with XML data.
edit: one more thing:
One of the key things you have to figure out with this approach is how much processing should be done on the server, and how much should be done in the app itself. Let cocoa do the things that cocoa is good at, and let PHP and MySQL do the things that they are good at.
You could write a generic PHP script to handle all queries: perform_query.php?querystring="SELECT * FROM .....", but that is hardly an optimal solution. Your best bet is several smaller PHP scripts that handle individual datasets for you. In my case, there was one to get the list of users, one to get the list of transactions, etc. Again, it all depends on what your app is going to do.
GDL2 is a nice example, based on EOF.
Instead of reinventing the wheel by writing your own communication wrapper to deal with MySQL from Cocoa, you could try the SMySQL framework (a.k.a. MCPKit), it was part of the CocoaMySQL application that evolved into the Sequel Pro project. It works with varying versions of MySQL, and seems to be quite robust.
If you need to understand how to incorporate it into your application, there's not much documentation around, but it has an easy to understand interface and you can see it working by looking at the source of Sequel Pro, which is downloadable from Google code.
There is also the CocoaMySQL-SBG fork of the CocoaMySQL project, but that seems to be out of date and I couldn't get it to build properly.
I've also implemented a simple object persistence framework based on sqlite, but it certainly wasn't trivial to do. I agree with eJames' conclusion- don't implement one yourself if you don't have to.
If you aren't committed to programming in Objective-C you might want to take a look at PyObjC which would allow you to program the database portion in Python. You can use the MySQLdb module for DB access and there are plenty of tutorials online for its use. It isn't hard to stuff the data back into Cocoa/CF classes and pass them back to your app.
The main caveat with PyObjC is that at the moment it doesn't work with Tiger.