?

Log in

No account? Create an account
I'm feeling vaguely positive about my final year project now. I met… - The tissue of the Tears of Zorro [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
tearsofzorro

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Apr. 4th, 2008|12:18 am]
tearsofzorro
[Tags|, , , , ]

I'm feeling vaguely positive about my final year project now.

I met up with my supervisor talking about where we needed to go, and what I was doing, and what little epiphany I had with regard to how I was going to implement it. From what I can gather, my supervisor is a bit like me in that his thoughts seem to be a weird little multi-dimensional plasma storm (the image makes sense in my head), so when he gets to talking about topics he knows a lot about, he assumes that you know the little maze in his head and all those little shortcuts that he takes. This means that I have to smile and nod when he's talking about certain things because what comes out of his mouth has to be simple human language, which doesn't seem to be an adequate medium for what's going on in his head. I'm aware that I can occasionally do that myself, and for those who've had to endure it, I apologise.

One wordstorm later, I leave with this feeling that my project is somehow simplified, and that my workaround was one that negated the necessity for a very tricky bit of the system that I didn't relish the thought of.

I still have a lot of work to do, but it's managable, and more than a slight chunk of it now involves python (in a webapp sense). This is exploration of home ground... it makes me happy. In fact python makes me feel like this.

It makes me feel like I can do this, and if I can, there's potential for a publication. That's a wow factor.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ebel
2008-04-04 09:24 am (UTC)
Wow, congrats!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tearsofzorro
2008-04-06 01:16 am (UTC)
I'm not out of the woods yet. In fact, I'm not sure I'm even in them yet.

However, I'm learning about interesting python web techs. I'm sure you've run across WSGI? It's basically a really simple way for framing webapps so that you can pick them up and plonk them into different contexts? It's partially a PITA, but in some ways it's great.

Basically, I can write a WSGI app and then decide that I want it running as an SCGI app or a Fastcgi app or an AJP app, or a cherrypy app or whatever the hell I decide, so long as the framework just treats the app in the way specified in the WSGI. Kinda cool separation of concerns. Also, flup is a cool project - it's what I'm using for my scgi app for the project and it's rather cool. There's SFA by way of useful documentation, but I may actually want to step in to rectify that.

The big problem I have with WSGI and flup and all of that is the minor fact that environ["wsgi.input"] is a right pain to parse when you get post data. Incredible pain. That's where the wiki falls short, and I want to just get myself to the point of understanding it just enough that I can contribute meaningfully to the wiki.

Actually, ever find that? For private/non-public wikis (why I say private/non-public, I don't know... for some reason I feel there should be a delineation between private and non-public) I'm far more cavalier. In Sun, for the group wiki I'd fill it with what I thought was going on, and I'd document like a demon. But for a public wiki I'm far more reserved. In a way, it seems strange; if a project is public there are more contributors who will be around to correct mistakes and fine details, but I'm still more reluctant to wade in.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ebel
2008-04-06 01:38 pm (UTC)
Yeah I've heard about WSGI, however the thing I'm working on is Zope, which is massively complicated and... 'javaish'. WSGI looks nice alright.

Re: wikis, I can totally understand that. I think there are a few fears at play. Firstly the fear that one'll accidentally reveal confidential data. Secondly the fear that one will say something not right and somehow it'll look bad for you/your organisation. Also with internal wikis, you know who's going to be looking at it, and you know who'll be reading it. You can be pretty confident that someone reading it is fairly techy. With public ones joe randomer might use it. This means you have to be more careful. The techy reader would be able to catch a mistake, joe randomer might not. No-one wants to give bad advise.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)