[Twisted-web] CPUShare-Twisted

[Lawrence Oluyede]

On 1/22/06, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea at cpushare.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 11:33:56AM +0100, Lawrence Oluyede wrote:
> > think it's wron and I don't know where one excludes the other. You can
>
> I've never said one excludes the other, I say that unit-test should not
> be mandatory, and if you should write the unit-test _after_ reviewing
> the code, not before.

I think that tests MUST BE mandatory in every project used and/or
developed from more than 1 people.

As Mr. Lefkowitz said in the other message Twisted is not test driven,
requires only test for submitted code and I think it's the right way
to go if you won't break older or future code.

> No my app isn't stateless, or I would be using the thread model too.
> The very cpushare protocol is complex in the way it handles race
> conditions and async event like disconnects, twisted makes life easy at
> the expense of scalability. This helps getting things working quick. And
> I use pb to attach the webserver to the cpushare server, this is why
> it's confortable for me to use twisted on the web side too (I'm not
> making queries to the db only).

Ok so you need Twisted, no question about that.

> Even before you write the unittest you should fix nevow, and that's not
> going to happen, it didn't happen in one year after I sent the first
> performance bottleneck reports, it sure can't happen in the few hours I
> spent writing these emails.

Why didn't you ask to join the project?

> Plus it'd be terrible to waste time on nevow when Cheetah is already an
> order of magnitude better and faster (IMHO of course).

Ok we are in the tastes domain :)

> The point is: if you think the same way I think, if you've similar needs
> to mine, switch to CPUShare-Twisted.

Understood.

--
Lawrence
http://www.oluyede.org/blog