Re: Which Java FastAGI implementation has the most "market share"?
2007-02-06 04:05:20 GMT
Matthew Rubenstein wrote: > > The real advantage in choosing an AGI (or CGI or ...) platform/language > is *reusing* the existing code that already runs on that platform, with Well of course you should pick whatever AGI implementation matches the rest of your environment best. > minimal porting to the platform in that language. How much does a Java > application, net/bean, or modern (1.4-6.x) class have to be revised to > make it work with asterisk-java as FastAGI instead of, say, AGI, CGI, > commandline, browser JVM, or other execution environment/UI? I'm not totally sure you're asking the right question here. Asterisk-java in combination with Asterisk and in my case Lumenvox is just a user interface for whatever application I am developing. In my case it's not even the only user interface I've created for my system (which happens to be in Home Automation which uses CORBA to connect the pieces together) - I've also got a web interface as well as other standalone front ends and even the light switches can be considered part of the UI (and therefore non reusable). Asterisk-java provides you with an ordinary JRE environment where you might not be in direct control of main() (though you can be if you really want to), but that's similar to the other server environments you mentioned (browser JVM is a different animal). So the real question isn't so much how a class needs to be revised for asterisk-java, it is does your back end system provide a robust API such that you can be dropped naked in the middle of a JRE woods and without(Continue reading)