Raphters, a web framework for C

Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface.

     void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response)
     {
          char body[1024];

          snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", request->param("username"));

          response->status(200);
          response->header("Content-Type", "text/html");
          response->write(body);
          response->end();
     }

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#5

Post by roel_v » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 5:43 PM UTC

rbranson wrote: post #4

This is neat. Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface. void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response) { char body[1024]; snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", reque…

Rather:

    response_set_status(200);
    response_set_header("Content-Type", "text/html");
    response_write(body);
    response_end();

The awkwardness of which, to me, demonstrates the superiority of C++ in this regard.

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#6

Post by DanWaterworth » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 5:50 PM UTC

rbranson wrote: post #4

This is neat. Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface. void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response) { char body[1024]; snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", reque…

It would be possible to support other gateway interfaces in raphters. The abstractions already exist.

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#7

Post by rbranson » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 5:51 PM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #5

rbranson wrote: post #4

This is neat. Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface. void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response) { char body[1024]; snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", reque…

Rather: response_set_status(200); response_set_header("Content-Type", "text/html"); response_write(body); response_end(); The awkwardness of which, to me, demonstrates the superiority of C++ in this regard.

Yeah that's what I get for being in the OOP world for the daily grind. I think a C API is still definitely for the best. Perhaps a nice shortcut API for this would be something like:

    response_complete(200, body, response_header("Content-Type", "text/html"));

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#8

Post by jerf » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 6:00 PM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #5

rbranson wrote: post #4

This is neat. Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface. void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response) { char body[1024]; snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", reque…

Rather: response_set_status(200); response_set_header("Content-Type", "text/html"); response_write(body); response_end(); The awkwardness of which, to me, demonstrates the superiority of C++ in this regard.

That implies some global state somewhere being updated, and now you've given up on threading. This may be OK, but it's still dangerous and leaky even if you give up on threading.

There are various solutions that still allow you to pass a set of closures without being particularly more ugly than anything else is in C, for instance, see http://library.gnome.org/devel/gobject/stable/chapter-signal... . C++ still ends up nicer, my point is just that you can do good things in C and there are libraries that implement the stuff for you.

That said, if I were really going this route I probably would try to go with some sort of minimal C++. Then again, my opinion is suspect, as I would never go this route anyhow. Web developers writing in languages that don't permit buffer overflows write software that has all the security of a colander; adding the ability to write good, solid buffer overflows as well hardly seems like a step up. You can write secure C code, but you can write secure PHP code, too. Existence proofs of secure code aren't very interesting.

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#9

Post by sigil » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 6:08 PM UTC

rbranson wrote: post #4

This is neat. Honestly, in addition, I'd like to see something like Rack for C. The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface. void application_main(web_request *request, web_response *response) { char body[1024]; snprintf(body, sizeof(body), "Hello, %s", reque…

> The "gateway interfaces" for C are too implementation-specific (CGI, FastCGI, SCGI, web server extensions/modules, etc). It would be something more abstract that would run on-top of a web server interface.

Yes. My preference in web apps (esp in C) is also to deal directly with http requests and responses. Although I wouldn't necessarily call that the "more abstract" approach. To an extent, each of these gateway interfaces is a different leaky abstraction for http.

Re: Raphters, a web framework for C

#10

Post by DanWaterworth » Mon, Apr 04, 2011, 6:19 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #8

roel_v wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rather: response_set_status(200); response_set_header("Content-Type", "text/html"); response_write(body); response_end(); The awkwardness of which, to me, demonstrates the superiority of C++ in this regard.

That implies some global state somewhere being updated, and now you've given up on threading. This may be OK, but it's still dangerous and leaky even if you give up on threading. There are various solutions that still allow you to pass a set of closures without being particularly more ugly than anything else is in C, for instance, see http://library.gnome.org/devel/gobject/stable/chapter-signal... . C++ still ends up…

You're right, web developers already write software with all the security of a colander. You can go one of two ways, 1.) you can devise a language that can't express an insecure application or 2.) you can teach people about security. I know which option I prefer.