3 ms·

I know HAppS advocated an approach of using static HTML with Javascript for content/dom stuff. From http://happs.org/ http://happs.org/: HAppS does not come wi

by smanek 17y ago

I know HAppS advocated an approach of using static HTML with Javascript for content/dom stuff. From http://happs.org/ http://happs.org/: HAppS does not come with a server-side templating system. We prefer the pattern of developing static web pages and using AJAX to populate them with dynamic content. Does Happstack take the same approach? Can anyone comment on how this architecture affects googlebot and other spiders?

dons 17y ago
See the release notes in the above link. happstack comes with: * HTML/XML/etc templating via HStringTemplate, HSP, or Text.XHtml with server-side templating, happstack is not happs, and emphasies pragmatism.
baguasquirrel 17y ago
You can pretty much use any old approach you'd like with Happstack. I am using it right now and it is very modular. You could conceivably use the Text.HTML module to make your own pages in the functional style. You can use HStringTemplate a la psp and php. Or you can do the fun, bloated and awful web 2.0 thing and write an ass-ton of javascript to do everything in the ajax-y fashion, and just use happstack to serve up json. A similar situation holds for the MACID data store. It looked ok to me, but I wanted to play with some distributed DBs instead (e.g. Mongo and Couch), and it works just fine there too. The important thing is that if you understand how HTTP works, how requests are served up, etc., then you can pretty much hit the ground running with happstack, without having to set up Apache and learn cgi or set up Tomcat and figure out how to get the default permissions on Ubuntu to work. So in that regard, it seems much closer to RoR than the traditional approach.
Dunearhp 17y ago
I've been using HStringTemplate on top of happstack quite happily. REST would be fairly easy to achieve using this approach. I would venture to suggest that most people would find it easier to adapt happstack directly to their needs than trying to use happs at this point in time.

by smanek 17y ago

dons 17y ago

See the release notes in the above link. happstack comes with: * HTML/XML/etc templating via HStringTemplate, HSP, or Text.XHtml with server-side templating, happstack is not happs, and emphasies pragmatism.

baguasquirrel 17y ago

You can pretty much use any old approach you'd like with Happstack. I am using it right now and it is very modular. You could conceivably use the Text.HTML module to make your own pages in the functional style. You can use HStringTemplate a la psp and php. Or you can do the fun, bloated and awful web 2.0 thing and write an ass-ton of javascript to do everything in the ajax-y fashion, and just use happstack to serve up json. A similar situation holds for the MACID data store. It looked ok to me, but I wanted to play with some distributed DBs instead (e.g. Mongo and Couch), and it works just fine there too. The important thing is that if you understand how HTTP works, how requests are served up, etc., then you can pretty much hit the ground running with happstack, without having to set up Apache and learn cgi or set up Tomcat and figure out how to get the default permissions on Ubuntu to work. So in that regard, it seems much closer to RoR than the traditional approach.

Dunearhp 17y ago

I've been using HStringTemplate on top of happstack quite happily. REST would be fairly easy to achieve using this approach. I would venture to suggest that most people would find it easier to adapt happstack directly to their needs than trying to use happs at this point in time.