FUDforum
Fast Uncompromising Discussions. FUDforum will get your users talking.

Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » chat on web, Ajax ?
Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: chat on web, Ajax ? [message #177184 is a reply to message #177180] Sat, 25 February 2012 13:15 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
The Natural Philosoph is currently offline  The Natural Philosoph
Messages: 993
Registered: September 2010
Karma:
Senior Member
Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <ji90od$k49$1(at)news(dot)albasani(dot)net>,
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid> wrote:
>
>> Tim Streater wrote:
>>> In article <ji8u4c$f4n$2(at)news(dot)albasani(dot)net>,
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid> wrote:
>>>> > Tim Streater wrote:
>>>> > In article <ji8brm$6k0$2(at)news(dot)albasani(dot)net>,
>>>> > The Natural Philosopher <tnp(at)invalid(dot)invalid> wrote:
>>>> > >> Tim Streater wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > Or you can wait until websockets is more widely available -
>> see >> RFC >> 6455:
>>>> >> > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Now that was worth a mention Tim.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Its an implementation the world badly needs, to do 'cloud'
>> based' >> stuff.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> In your OPINION when is it likely to be something that apache
>> and >> >> most browsers understand..or is it even a browser issue at
>> all?
>>>> > > Apache doesn't need to be involved, the browser can use it to >
>>>> communicate with any listening software. There've been a couple of
>>>> > iterations of the websockets handshake but looks now like its
>> been > >> finalised so we can hope that browsers soon implement the
>> final spec.
>>>> > > Last year I was testing it for use with my email client, Safari
>>>> 5.1 > implements it and I was able to find a listener (several in
>>>> fact) > written in PHP. I want this since at present I'm using AJAX
>> to >> an > instance of apache, but that's way too heavy for the app's
>> actual >> needs.
>>>>
>>>> Great. But I suspect its going to be another massive security hole
>>>> opened up ...:-(
>>>> Perhaps. In my case its all within localhost.
>>> yes. The app I may use this on is all within my LAN.
>>
>> Its seems firefox 10.0.2 is quite happy to websocket away.
>>
>> Just needs a daemon for the server...inetd? yep that'll do..and a
>> leetle teensy bit of code to be invoked by it.
>>
>> Got any serverside cribs
>>
>> All I found was this..
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/phpwebsocket/source/browse/trunk/%20phpwebsocket/s erv
>>
>> er.php
>> ?
>
> Could start here:
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_WebSocket_implementations>
>
> I did some tests with this one:
>
> <https://github.com/jam1401>
>

that's worth a look..

> I also found something called daemonize that allows me to write a daemon
> as a PHP script but have it run as a proper background daemon.
>

well you can always attach a script to inetd..for low volume use.

And a C style daemon is not the worst programming job in the world..

I've been mixing C and PHP recently, and to be honest there is not a
great deal of difference in coding time. And once you have a makefile
source->binary for small projects is not much slower than saving a php
file :-)
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: FastCGI & PHP
Next Topic: PHP socket and NAT
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ]

Current Time: Wed Nov 27 01:45:51 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03776 seconds