4 ms·
I don't find this to be true at all. > you need an external server Spoiler, you need an external server for everything on the web; you've just been brainwashe
by tlackemann 5y ago
I don't find this to be true at all.
> you need an external server
Spoiler, you need an external server for everything on the web; you've just been brainwashed to think serverless is actually that.
- thecatspaw 5y agoYou do not need an _external_ server for a lot of languages. If you use node for example you can use the express package to run a custom server, or embedded tomcat for java
- tlackemann 5y agoI suppose, but I've never encountered a production site that was using Gunicorn or similar as a true server. Usually that's coupled with something like Nginx or HAProxy. So yeah, you technically don't need one for Ruby or Node.js, but I sure would.
- redm 5y agoPHP has a built in web server you can launch from the CLI and run the script. `php -S <address:port>`
- __MatrixMan__ 5y agoGood point, but just to nitpick: I think that ipfs-js let's your external server be a process in someone else's browser, which is about as unserverlike as servers get.
- boudin 5y agoWhat are you talking about? Lots of languages and frameworks make it easy to be self-hosted with there own server. In Python, .net, Go, Rust this is quite common. This means that your app can be a self-contained app + server and the server part can have some business logic as well. With Go, .net, Rust apps (and potentially others) that's quite nice to be able to produce a single binary app that you can just run anywhere without installing any framework or setting up any external server and it's ready to listen to incoming queries. That can even be a good enough setup for home things that are not exposed to the web and where setting up reverse proxies could be overkill.