4 ms·

From the Learn More link at the bottom [1]: > Note the awesome Shakespearean inspired name convention. Another good reason to use yesod. Lol. > Until here I

From the Learn More link at the bottom [1]: > Note the awesome Shakespearean inspired name convention. Another good reason to use yesod. Lol. > Until here I believe it goes in the right direction. Even if I believe the real future is by generating HTML pages from the client (using javascript) and server limited to serve JSON (or XML, or any object representation system). This is a little unclear. Do you mean, prior to Yesod you thought web development was heading in the right direction, but Yesod made you realize there was a much better way, even if the future is HTML5 rich web apps with the app server as a JSON/XML API endpoint? 1. http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Yesod-excellent-ideas/ http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Yesod-excellent-idea...

snoyberg 15y ago
I can't answer with certainty what the author means, but the next set of features planned for Yesod is to have tighter client-side integration. We also agree that's where web app development is headed, but we wanted to start with a solid server-side framework before branching into the client side.
yogsototh 15y ago
Mainly, I believe that most the energy put in Yesod goes on the problem I find the most important. - Security by default, directly imported from the Haskell type system. - Fast, also, because Haskell is quite fast compared to most languages used for the web. - Able to manage a lot of concurrent connexions, - Incredible foundation language, Haskell is simply awesome (look at my latest blog post for details[^1]). On the other hand, IMHO, the future of the web might be: - an API server as good as possible (fast/distributed/clever) - many good quality dynamic (and generally native) clients Therefore, I find most of the effort put in the HTML/CSS/JS generation while impressive not so essential for what I look. On the other hand, the notion of Yesod's widget is a very clever first step in the direction of web component abstraction. So in conclusion, yes, Yesod went a step further from what I expected from server side web technologies when I discovered it. [^1]: http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-the-Hard-Way/ http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-the-Hard-Way...
- cpeterso 15y ago
  Your Haskell tutorial is a very helpful introduction. Thanks! :)

snoyberg 15y ago

I can't answer with certainty what the author means, but the next set of features planned for Yesod is to have tighter client-side integration. We also agree that's where web app development is headed, but we wanted to start with a solid server-side framework before branching into the client side.

yogsototh 15y ago

Mainly, I believe that most the energy put in Yesod goes on the problem I find the most important. - Security by default, directly imported from the Haskell type system. - Fast, also, because Haskell is quite fast compared to most languages used for the web. - Able to manage a lot of concurrent connexions, - Incredible foundation language, Haskell is simply awesome (look at my latest blog post for details[^1]). On the other hand, IMHO, the future of the web might be: - an API server as good as possible (fast/distributed/clever) - many good quality dynamic (and generally native) clients Therefore, I find most of the effort put in the HTML/CSS/JS generation while impressive not so essential for what I look. On the other hand, the notion of Yesod's widget is a very clever first step in the direction of web component abstraction. So in conclusion, yes, Yesod went a step further from what I expected from server side web technologies when I discovered it. [^1]: http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-the-Hard-Way/ http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-the-Hard-Way...

cpeterso 15y ago
Your Haskell tutorial is a very helpful introduction. Thanks! :)