black hole

[koo5]

not really a PR, just so we don't forget this

[amirouche]

If message_text is a scheme string, not need to call toString after g_scm2host

[amirouche]

There is several things that are not correct, but I have to recognize that I am impressed 💯 Did you know Scheme before?

The first error is that the translate procedure should be exposed Scheme side, g_scm2host inside main.scm... but that is not all!

The main problem is that the framework does not support async callbacks or xhr... and those are dealt differently. xhr should be a procedure that I already created in the past but did not have time to add to this code based and that is slightly complex to come up with (even its use is straightforward, it is like await fetch(...) without the await keyword`.

Regarding async callbacks, one need to take advantage of the change procedure defined inside webui-app.

webui/demos/04-convo/main.scm

Lines 573 to 577 in 2efdb68

	;; change procedure allows to sneak into the app closure
	(define (change proc)
	(let ((new (proc model)))
	(set! model new)
	(render)))

change should be passed to proc inside make-controller:

webui/demos/04-convo/main.scm

Lines 563 to 567 in 2efdb68

	(define (make-controller proc)
	(lambda (event)
	(let ((new (proc model event)))
	(set! model new)
	(render))))

Anyway, I was under the impression that communication with nlu-convo would be done over a REST API, with some HTTP hook to send messages from the users? What do you think @logicmoo?

[amirouche]

I am not sure what you want to do with g_scm_call if you want to retrieve the result scheme side that is not the way to go... see the finale review note.

[amirouche]

Inside let you do not need begin.

[amirouche]

eventually the schedule-a-mock-reply will look like (mock-reply msg (then change) (err change)) where then look like:

(define (then change)
  (lambda (translation)
    (change (lambda (model) (new-message! translation) model)))

Or something along those lines...

[amirouche]

Except the non-idiomatic indentation of parentheses I see that the javascript is bound in scheme, that is good but the wrong interface like explained in the review message, the interface should be different.

[amirouche]

... should be different but it is not doable at the moment.

[koo5]

alrighty. I wasn't trying to imply exactly how the UI should eventually work, just wanted to understand your stack a bit