On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Max Desyatov <explicitcall@googlemail.com> wrote:
Simon Michael <simon@joyful.com> writes:

> I can give a +1 vote for the Hack api and related libs. (Jinjing Wang
> is a one-man army.) Below hack you'll run happstack or another
> web-serving lib. Above hack you might run some combination of loli,
> maid, the hack middleware modules, hsp.
>
> The advantage is that changing the low-level server in future is a
> matter of changing one or two lines; and the upper-level utilities
> seem more usable to me than current happstack's.

The problem is that `hack` isn't documented at all and that prevents it
from being in wide use.  At least, when I started my web app, I
preferred happstack, as low-level and documented API is better than
high-level API without a little bit of documentation, examples and
tutorials.

I don't see how you can call hack a "high-level API." It's about as low-level as it gets, kind of equivalent to the CGI protocol. I wrote up a little blog article with a hack introduction (http://blog.snoyman.com/2009/06/28/hack-introduction/). I would also recommend checking out my hack-samples repo on github (http://github.com/snoyberg/hack-samples/tree/master).

Overall, hack is still developing, so the documentation is a little lacking. However, I at least am using it in production on a few sites (http://eliezer.snoyman.com, http://wordify.snoyman.com).

Michael