A simple new web (HTTP, HTML, JS) replacement based on s-expressions and lisp. It would be useful for things like file hosting, wikipedia/wikis, BBSs, online newpapers/blogs, imageboards, youtube/mediagoblin style video sites.
Instead of XML we use s-exp for markup. It will be a very simple functional markup language that could be defined in a page or two. We will not allow it to grow and grow horribly like the W3C to the point that it's impossible to implement from scratch.
Instead of javascript we use a simple lisp language (similar to R5RS without continuations) which is interpreted with strict resource and permission bounds, so it will never do anything you do not allow it including swamping your computer down like current js JIT systems.
For servers, instead of tools similar to PHP we will use systems inspired by type-checking that are able to statically ensure that no vulnerabilities in the class of XSS/SQL injection/... exist.
1. A first draft design needs to be created.
2. It should be easy to get something up and running quite fast by writing a proxy that translates all this s-exp stuff into HTML - just for the purpose of prototyping.
3. Reference implementations from scratch - focus on low memory usage and stability (using safe languages instead of C or C++).
I was thinking about layout, you could try have primitives for splitting the current frame into parts proportional, fixed size or some kind of springyness that gets its size from the content.
Not sure how but you also need to be able to put paragraphs of text, fixed width text and headings in. Any ideas on this? It might work okay if you could just put each media element (a paragraph of text, a button, an image, a grid/table of data, whatever) on a newline.
There should also be a tree based layout ul/li which would let you do bulleted lists as well as threaded conversations (reddit/hacker news style).
>>105 We followed this rule while world4ch was still alive. There is a difference between ``LUA > C LMAOOOO XDDDD'' and ``LE LE >MUH /G/ BACK TO LE LE LE LE E/G/IN >2014 LMAO XDDDDDDDD''.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-23 19:44
>>58 Link at the bottom in case anybody forgot, but mostly because I just noticed the markup system I thought up over the last few days was essentially this one and I don't want anyone else to waste their time just because they didn't have their old /prog/ stuff sorted.
On a different note, how does the layouter know which text segments belong together? One obvious way is to tag sections in the original source and act on those in the layout, but that would basically recreate HTML, complete with its <div> madness you can see in just about any site. I propose the following: Sections that are to be layouted differently are put into different units, like files. Layout would still be pretty straightforward: After all, every unit already has a unique name and can be accessed without any trouble or relevant overhead. However, the important thing remains clean. No XML ENTERPRISE shit, not even ((excessive amounts) of (sexprs)). Just content and maybe simple lispy markup.
Also, what is the consensus on having an index for each site? Right now, there is no way to see which ``subpages'' are accessible. What if every site contained an index that lists all accessible items, complete with their associated units for content and layout? In theory, this sounds easy to navigate and provides a simple entry point for clients, but I might have missed something important.
>>115 Admin-sama thought about setting up a /prog/ repo recently, maybe he already did. You'll probably find him on the IRC.
Name:
Anonymous2014-05-29 1:28
I could do it in chicken scheme though if people would rather. The way it would work is it wwould just be the login shell, instead of bash.. but it just interfaces with the board doesnt let you run commands
