New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
connections should be transparent #8
Comments
Okay, so this is what I've been running into on this: As Node is single-threaded, it's hard to duplicate transparent sessions (though I totally agree) in terms of sorting through The only way I can think of doing this is to require logging on all I've gone back and forth on this several times in the past two weeks, as requiring users remember to use Any input you have on the matter is appreciated. |
BTW, a REPL vantage extension is coming soon... with an additional bonus... |
Oh, sorry, I don't follow, can you please elaborate? |
Sure. Say your remote vantage server has this command:
Now, suppose 3 clients log in to this server at the same time. Client 2 runs We can do a few things here:
What we can't do is:
In other words, the remote server has no way of knowing who originated what logging, as all stdout is on a single thread. When a vantage action runs, I know who is running the action, so if you used So there's a few ways to do this, but I'm not sure what the best way is. Does that make any more sense? If I'm totally misduplicating your issue, just let me know. |
makes sense, not sure the answer. I guess reason i opened this issue was that the current behaviour was surprising. |
Don't worry - it was a good point. Mid a large refactor (https://github.com/dthree/vantage/tree/authentication) which is doing a thorough fix on the whole subject you brought up. I'll let you know when it's good to go. |
Finished session refactor - all logging now goes through Otherwise, many other updates were completed including authentication, and Vantage is production ready at 1.0! Hope you have a change to try it out. |
Piping stdout downstream.
Perhaps there's a good use-case for this but by default it would be nice if connecting from a remote did nothing but connect up the repl. If someone wants to suck the stdout into their connected client, then they could make a command for that (or you could make it a standard built-in command).
In addition, it probably shouldn't redirect output totally, rather it should just duplicate the output.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: