[Ur] New website?

[Adam Chlipala]

On 08/10/2015 05:06 AM, Sergey Mironov wrote:
>>> As for urweb-callback, the mailing-list archives will show my skepticism
>>> of the basic abstraction, at the time it was being designed.  I remain
>>> unconvinced that it's necessary, given the periodic-tasks functionality
>>> built into Ur/Web.
>> I understand that point of view, it just seems like a useful library in some
>> situations.
>>
> Regarding the urweb-callback issue - I think it is definitely useful
> for OS communication, where periodic tasks may not meet latency
> constraints. From the other hand, the low-level structure of the
> library seems to me not very good now. I would like to re-design it.
> Replacing queues and thread manager with simpler constructs is
> probably a good idea . I hope I'll do this some day.

This question of latency is precisely where we disagreed last time. I 
remain unconvinced that it matters for enough cases to justify building 
an FFI callback library.  I don't think anyone ran any performance 
experiments with alternative implementations last time, to gather 
evidence for one perspective or another.