|
Feb
Tue
5th
|
Sep
Mon
17th
|
Sep
Wed
5th
Applicatives are too restrictive, breaking Applicatives and introducing Functional BuildersThis post aims to document a practical design implementation we came up with when designing some APIs in Scala. Of course the concept is not Scala specific and applies to other functional languages. If you don’t want to go into the full introduction, this post talks about how Applicatives are too restrictive and breaking them into two independent components can be interesting for Contravariant and Invariant Functors. Jump to implementation attached. We are taking JSON serialization/deserialization as a motivating example.
Implementing Writing JSON we have its dual:
Implementing Writes provides a way to write JSON for a type We have also a type that represents both, being able to read and write a JSON for an
Reads happens to be a monad, which is interesting but we are not going to talk about this much more. What we are interested in is having a simple way of combining JSON serializers, meaning if we have
it could be very interesting to have a This is actually quite easy to achieve with Applicative Functors. To simplify, Applicative Functors are Functors (having the map or fmap function implemented) together with the Applicative part which adds the power we need to achieve the combination we want to do. Explaining Applicative Functors is out of scope and there is a lot of material on the web explaining these.
This composition simply means that if we have two readers of two different types, they could read from the same JSON and provide two values which I can pack into another type (User here). Now that we solved our problem of combining the Reads with Applicative Functors, wouldn’t it be even more interesting if we could combine similarly the Writes? Having:
then we could have a Almost. If we have two writers (capable of writing two different JsValue from two different types, Int and String here) then we end up with two Let’s do a new type that only writes
Now it makes sense to have one writer out of our two writes above ( writeAge, writeName) by simply merging the resulting objects. So logically it makes sense, except that we can’t use our Applicative based builder since an OWrites is not a Functor at all! Actually our OWrite is, naturally, the dual of a Functor, a CoFunctor (or Contravariant). Put simply, this means that to change the
So or status here, we know how to transform the type of OWrites, we know how to merge two OWrites but all of that doesn’t help us to use the builder which based on an Applicative Functor. What if we split our problem into two components. Let’s introduce a new type that we call FunctionalCanBuild:
Meaning for a given container M, we can some how compose two instances into one with the tuple of the type parameters. So for Reads it will be:
and for the OWrites it will make:
But that gets us only half way through what we want to achieve. What we want is actually a Reads and OWrites of User and not tuple of Int, String. For the So it seems that separating the problem into two sub problems is working for us. But what about format? Format is not a Functor and a Contra, it is actually Invariant. This means that it need functions in both directions, Like the
Now we can implement FunctionalCanBuild[OFormat] :
and once we have the This led us to an API that is capable of building compositions for Functors ( Bottom Line: By breaking ps: FunctionalCanBuild[M[_]] may look like a monoid but it is not exactly one. ps2: This is a work I did together with @mandubian and other Zenexity guys ps3: The Format,Reads and Writes approach is copied and adapted from @debasishg on sjson ps4: This work is integrated into Play’s included JSON library ps5: A potentially more readable version as a gist |
Jul
Mon
9th
|
Jul
Sun
8th
Is socket.push(bytes) all what you need to program Realtime Web apps?One of the goals of Play2 architecture is to provide a programming model for what is called Realtime Web Applications. Realtime Web ApplicationsRealtime Web Applications are applications making use of Websockets, Server Sent Events, Comet or other protocols offering/simulating an open socket between the browser and the server for continuous communication. Basically, these applications offer to users delivery of information as it is published without having the user periodically pinging the service. There are quite a few web frameworks that target the development of this type of applications. Mostly, however, the solution is by providing an API that allows developers to push/receive messages from/to an open channel, something like:
Though this kind of API offers an opportunity to get started doing Realtime Web, it doesn’t offer a programming model for dealing with the challenges encountered when programming with streams of data, including creating, adapting, manipulating, filtering and merging streams of data and all of the synchronization involved. A Programming ModelSince development of Realtime Web Apps is mostly built around manipulation of streams of data, it is crucial to have a programming model which identifies clearly what a stream of data is and defines composable components to deal with it. It is obvious that the above channel api falls short when manipulating a rich set of streams of data, but even the classic InputStream/OutputStreams interfaces are not sufficient. Forgetting about their inefficient blocking runtime properties, they don’t carry enough signals/information to allow building rich stream manipulation api. Play2 uses Iteratees together with Futures for dealing with streams of data, providing a very rich model for programming rich Realtime Web Applications. A sample Realtime Web AppThe goal of this text isn’t to provide a detailed description of what Iteratees and pals are. Nevertheless I will go into a fast introduction and then move into an example illustrating few aspects of how powerful this approach is.
Our sample application features two streams, one is a stream of financial operations:
Here we are generating random values at random distances (of maximum 500ms). In the real world this stream could be coming from a datastore or an open socket with another server. An
The other stream we have is a stream of system messages, messages that talk about the status of the system:
This stream can be coming from another server or datastore. With these two streams at hand, we can prooduce one single stream that contains messages of both by interleaving them:
Actually those not comfortable using symbolic operators can use
Now the model part of our application looks like: Our sample Realtime Web App features:Our application will publish this stream of Authorization:You can only see
Filtering:You can filter the stream by range of interest in the amount of the operation. By providing an upper and lower bounds you get only corresponding operations, for this we create another
JSON:Our App will be pushing JSON messages to the browser, that’s why we need one more
For convenience, let’s produce one single adapter out of the three we got, for that we can use the
We’re almost done. Now all what we need is to respond to the browser with an
Here we pass our stream through the Our application now looks like: All what we need now from the client side is to connect to the stream using the following javascript: feed = new EventSource(‘/feed?role=@role&lower=’ + min + ‘&higher=’ + max) Snapshots of our Realtime Web App: /manager
Bottom LineRealtime Web involves dealing with different streams of data from different sources. It is hard to do any non-trivial application without having a programming model that contains an appropriate representation of a stream and necessary API for creating, adapting, filtering and consuming streams of data. Play2 uses Note: Full working application source was created by me @sadache and @guillaumebort for one of our talks Note2: Probably a more readable version of this post Note3: Examples of Realtime Web Apps using Play2 Typesafe Console lichess.org |
Jul
Tue
3rd
|
Jul
Sun
1st
Bits'bout Play2 Architecture
Play2 Simple HTTP APIEssential blueprint of Play2 architecture is pretty simple and it should be easy to explain in a fairly short blog post. The framework can be understood progressively at different levels; each time having better exposure to some aspects of its design. The core of Play2 is really small, surrounded by a fair amount of useful APIs, services and structure to make Web Programming tasks easier. Basically, Play2 is an API that abstractly have the folllowing type
Which is a computation that takes the request header Now this type presumes putting request body entirely into memory (or disk), even if you only want to compute a value out of it, or better forward it to a storage service like Amazon S3. We rather want to receive request body chunks as a stream and be able to process them progressively if necessary. What we need to change is the second arrow to make it receive its input in chunks and eventually produce a result. There is a type that does exactly this, it is called Iteratee and takes two type parameters.
For the first arrow, we are simply using the Function[From,To] type aliased with
The Result type, on the other hand, can be abstractly thought of as the response headers and the body of the response
Such type exists and is called
It is a bit more practical to be able to stream and write to the socket anything that is convertible to an
Bottom LineThe essential Play2 HTTP API is quite simple:
Which reads as the following: Take the From this point we can explore how does this simple API behave in the runtime management of Play2 (Threads), what opportunities it opens (NIO, Reactive, Streams, File Upload …) and how can we easily extend it to model different architectural patterns (Classical MVC, Resource Oriented, …) |
|
Jun
Sat
30th
Scala, Functional Programming and Play 2.0
|
Mar
Thu
22nd
|
→ |