misc:alternative_architecture_for_hybrid_applications
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
misc:alternative_architecture_for_hybrid_applications [2016/07/06 13:04] – [Server app] mithat | misc:alternative_architecture_for_hybrid_applications [2016/07/17 03:31] – [Node.js] mithat | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
This architecture does a good job of leveraging Web technologies to create secure conventional desktop apps. In addition, frameworks like Electron and NW.js have matured to the point that developing hybrid apps that use many desktop app conventions is relatively easy. | This architecture does a good job of leveraging Web technologies to create secure conventional desktop apps. In addition, frameworks like Electron and NW.js have matured to the point that developing hybrid apps that use many desktop app conventions is relatively easy. | ||
- | ===== REST-based hybrid | + | ===== A REST-based hybrid |
One alternative to the conventional hybrid approach is a REST-based architecture. A REST-based approach requires more carefully considered design but offers the potential for greater flexibility. | One alternative to the conventional hybrid approach is a REST-based architecture. A REST-based approach requires more carefully considered design but offers the potential for greater flexibility. | ||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
In this model, the tightly bound user< | In this model, the tightly bound user< | ||
- | The other change in the above model is that the REST server is implemented in C++. When this is the case, interacting with the host system | + | The other change in the above model is that the REST server is implemented in any high-level language on which a REST server |
The two changes outlined above are decoupled---meaning that either can be adopted in the absence of the other. | The two changes outlined above are decoupled---meaning that either can be adopted in the absence of the other. | ||
- | One downside to using C++ (or Java, or Python...) for the server part of this approach | + | One obvious requirement |
- | ===== Future work ===== | + | --------------------------------------------------- |
- | ==== Server | + | |
+ | ===== Server | ||
* Create test case(s) using PHP and/or Node.js to get an idea of app responsiveness and interaction issues. | * Create test case(s) using PHP and/or Node.js to get an idea of app responsiveness and interaction issues. | ||
* Attach WebSockets, Server-sent events, long polling, or similar to determine client scalability. | * Attach WebSockets, Server-sent events, long polling, or similar to determine client scalability. | ||
- | === Notes/question | + | ==== Notes/questions/ |
* Persistence: | * Persistence: | ||
* Security model: | * Security model: | ||
Line 41: | Line 42: | ||
* Embedded (i.e., one-and-only-app) vs. desktop app | * Embedded (i.e., one-and-only-app) vs. desktop app | ||
- | === PHP === | + | ==== PHP ==== |
* What server? | * What server? | ||
* Is there a native PHP server that is good enough? | * Is there a native PHP server that is good enough? | ||
* [[https:// | * [[https:// | ||
* [[https:// | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * Bitnami? | ||
* What PHP? | * What PHP? | ||
- | * Can " | + | * Can " |
+ | |||
+ | The above are not issues for embedded application as the machine' | ||
+ | * Frameworks | ||
+ | * Silex | ||
+ | * Good community support. | ||
+ | * Good Composer and module support. | ||
+ | * Documentation is a bit obtuse. | ||
+ | * Out of the box twig support. Redbean support is available. | ||
+ | * Has a good ReST code structure but you wouldn' | ||
+ | * Slim | ||
+ | * Slim 3 has removed some functionality that might be good to have. | ||
+ | * Fat Free Framework | ||
+ | * Compact, more than what's needed. | ||
+ | * Excellent ReST code structure. | ||
+ | * Twig and Redbean support are available. | ||
+ | * Not sure Composer is well supported. | ||
+ | * Check cookies/ | ||
+ | * Persistence | ||
+ | * Redbean | ||
+ | * ini and other format file (search Packagist for [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[http:// | ||
- | The above are not issues for embedded application | + | ==== Node.js ==== |
+ | * Doesn' | ||
+ | * There is also a " | ||
+ | * Frameworks | ||
+ | * I don't see much reason not to use Express.js. | ||
+ | * Persistence | ||
+ | * My [[http:// | ||
+ | * My [[http:// | ||
- | ==== Client | + | ==== Python |
- | | + | |
- | - I suspect the former | + | * Flask and Flask-RESTful are a good combination. |
- | - If served, by a separate server or by the same server that's handling | + | * Has a development |
+ | * Has the " | ||
+ | * Config files and sqlite are TODO. | ||
+ | ===== Client ===== | ||
+ | * To be served or simply loaded from file? | ||
+ | * I suspect the former is better because of security/ | ||
+ | * If served, by a separate server or by the same server that's handling the API? | ||
misc/alternative_architecture_for_hybrid_applications.txt · Last modified: 2016/07/22 21:42 by mithat