in reply to Re: Show me the missing Big Deal of POE.
in thread Show me the missing Big Deal of POE.

In a current endeavor, I am starting to use POE. Admittedly, it's because I don't feel like writing a state machine plus a server; however, it appears that POE seems to make this a bit easier by providing a framework. Of course, it feels a bit like wrapping oneself around MPW, Metrowerks, RogueWave, or MFC, but still it's a decent framework.

I am curious as to the performance of the beastie in a production environment, as opposed to writing a simpler graph used as a callback table, triggered on transitions, vis-a-vis NerveCenter et al.

I do believe that writing drop-in components will become easier once I write a more generic Component loader -- or at least settle on a well-defined directory/folder structure for the packages --, since to achieve such ease of extensibility, the Component/Filter/Wheel paradigm must evolve to a new abstraction, such as a generic plug-in with a set directory OR package structure. Just as we tend to write -- or some variant thereof -- ...

pacakge Foo; sub new { my $this = shift; my $class = ref($this) || $this; my $self = {}; bless $self, $class; return $self; } 1;
...so too will we see the likes in POE.

-v
"Perl. There is no substitute."

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Show me the missing Big Deal of POE.
by apachepunk (Initiate) on Aug 04, 2004 at 04:49 UTC
    I do believe POE makes implementation of event based programs more easier than some of the other frameworks that your mentioned that I have used e.g. MFC. As of right now it might lack some functonality of the big boys but I feel its getting there. As for writing a state engine from scratch, perl says dont re-invent the wheel. If its out there just plug it in. I too am trying some intresting things with POE. Will keep you updated on how it goes.