REST as JMS
- I was thinking:
Why not use REST as a simplified messaging system between components?
This way a component could be a servlet.
Components are also decoupled.
Any thoughts? Any experience ?
- * rogervdkimmenade <rvdkimmenade@...> [2007-09-17 12:55]:
> I was thinking:Using REST as a model for apps on the system is an idea that goes
> Why not use REST as a simplified messaging system between
> components? This way a component could be a servlet.
> Components are also decoupled.
> Any thoughts?
back quite a bit; you’re not the first to whom this occurs, and
it seems quite reasonable.
In fact, the core ideas of Unix have a lot of constraints in
common with the REST style (a uniform interface, addressability,
etc). Unix doesn’t go as far though, and if you go a bit further
you stumble into all manner of departures from the “everything is
a file” concept like like processes and terminals and ioctls and
various kinds of flatfile databases and oh god it’s a tangled
That is in part because of a failure of imagination at the time;
the original designers just didn’t see how to fit many of the
odd-shaped things into the file system. The qmail approach to
configuration is an example of how they could have decomposed
more of the system in terms of files.
So then they made another go in attempt to stick to a radically
conservative approach to fix this mess, and what came out of that
effort is now known as Plan 9. And that does indeed work out much
more nicely. Pity it never really caught on.
> Any experience ?I don’t think anyone has used specifically a REST-based
architecture to build applications or an operating system.
But, as per above, we do have positive experience with systems
built to honour *some* of its constraints, and they show that
stricter adherence yields better results.
So the idea of using REST as a style for more than just web apps
is certainly not absurd.
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>