diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'archives/extend/2014-September.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | archives/extend/2014-September.txt | 526 |
1 files changed, 526 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/archives/extend/2014-September.txt b/archives/extend/2014-September.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..58303855 --- /dev/null +++ b/archives/extend/2014-September.txt @@ -0,0 +1,526 @@ +From paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com Mon Sep 15 23:24:20 2014 +From: paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com (Paulo F. Oliveira) +Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:24:20 +0100 +Subject: [99s-extend] Using cowboy_req:body more than once per request +Message-ID: <CA+dV7cT+POGJM=nqBcvnP_NoZUa=_ZHjGx-9gBQ+09Pe7aE2bg@mail.gmail.com> + +Hi. + +I recently implemented a checksum header (X-Checksum) that allows +validating the content of a request's body by hash comparison (just to give +you some context). I'm using the onrequest hook to affect all requests (and +be able to reply appropriately for non-conformance to the hash function +result) but can't figure out how to not read the request body twice, i.e. I +read it in the onrequest hook but later on need to read it again in the +route handler, but I can't (from the manual, for cowboy_req:body: "This +function can only be called once. Cowboy will not cache the result of this +call."). At the moment, and because the API consumers were in a hurry, the +solution I found (I understand it might be an ugly hack), was to read the +body, store it in the Req's meta (property body, for example) and then +access that property later on, instead of using cowboy_req:body. I'm not +quite happy with this solution and was wondering if there is anything more +elegant that I can implement. + +Thanks. + +Cheers. + +- Paulo F. Oliveira +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140915/26d4e023/attachment-0001.html> + +From paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com Mon Sep 15 23:34:48 2014 +From: paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com (Paulo F. Oliveira) +Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:34:48 +0100 +Subject: [99s-extend] :binding doc +Message-ID: <CA+dV7cTDYsbcVjwO3wxNpzpo0V3gcO+XoY44Yjbc6K1OB8zuVw@mail.gmail.com> + +Hi. + +This can be read in the cowboy_req:binding doc: "By default the value is a +binary, however constraints may change the type of this value (for example +automatically converting numbers to integer)." + +What constraints are we talking about here? + +Also, there's no reference to the fact that the bindings are URL-decoded, +even though they appear to be. + +Cheers. + +- Paulo F. Oliveira +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140915/5f3302e4/attachment.html> + +From paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com Mon Sep 15 23:55:39 2014 +From: paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com (Paulo F. Oliveira) +Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:55:39 +0100 +Subject: [99s-extend] :binding doc +Message-ID: <CA+dV7cQkY9k0RSaR+_ja1MQae=f-Yb2Wp7aFGok3ORA=jSE+aA@mail.gmail.com> + +OK, I guess "constraints" refers to this: +http://ninenines.eu/docs/en/cowboy/HEAD/guide/routing/#constraints + +:D + +Cheers. + +- Paulo F. Oliveira +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140915/d97a6072/attachment.html> + +From essen at ninenines.eu Tue Sep 16 00:15:44 2014 +From: essen at ninenines.eu (=?UTF-8?B?TG/Dr2MgSG9ndWlu?=) +Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:15:44 +0200 +Subject: [99s-extend] :binding doc +In-Reply-To: <CA+dV7cTDYsbcVjwO3wxNpzpo0V3gcO+XoY44Yjbc6K1OB8zuVw@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CA+dV7cTDYsbcVjwO3wxNpzpo0V3gcO+XoY44Yjbc6K1OB8zuVw@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <[email protected]> + +On 09/15/2014 11:34 PM, Paulo F. Oliveira wrote: +> Also, there's no reference to the fact that the bindings are +> URL-decoded, even though they appear to be. + +Cowboy decodes everything. If you feel it's helpful to mention, please +send a patch. + +-- +Lo?c Hoguin +http://ninenines.eu + +From essen at ninenines.eu Tue Sep 16 00:22:27 2014 +From: essen at ninenines.eu (=?UTF-8?B?TG/Dr2MgSG9ndWlu?=) +Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:22:27 +0200 +Subject: [99s-extend] Using cowboy_req:body more than once per request +In-Reply-To: <CA+dV7cT+POGJM=nqBcvnP_NoZUa=_ZHjGx-9gBQ+09Pe7aE2bg@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CA+dV7cT+POGJM=nqBcvnP_NoZUa=_ZHjGx-9gBQ+09Pe7aE2bg@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <[email protected]> + +It seems a bit weird to me to read the body and validate it before +validating the request itself. + +I would explicitly put these checks in the handler directly. This of +course means that there is no need to read it twice anymore. + +On 09/15/2014 11:24 PM, Paulo F. Oliveira wrote: +> Hi. +> +> I recently implemented a checksum header (X-Checksum) that allows +> validating the content of a request's body by hash comparison (just to +> give you some context). I'm using the onrequest hook to affect all +> requests (and be able to reply appropriately for non-conformance to the +> hash function result) but can't figure out how to not read the request +> body twice, i.e. I read it in the onrequest hook but later on need to +> read it again in the route handler, but I can't (from the manual, for +> cowboy_req:body: "This function can only be called once. Cowboy will not +> cache the result of this call."). At the moment, and because the API +> consumers were in a hurry, the solution I found (I understand it might +> be an ugly hack), was to read the body, store it in the Req's meta +> (property body, for example) and then access that property later on, +> instead of using cowboy_req:body. I'm not quite happy with this solution +> and was wondering if there is anything more elegant that I can implement. +> +> Thanks. +> +> Cheers. +> +> - Paulo F. Oliveira +> +> +> _______________________________________________ +> Extend mailing list +> Extend at lists.ninenines.eu +> https://lists.ninenines.eu/listinfo/extend +> + +-- +Lo?c Hoguin +http://ninenines.eu + +From paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com Tue Sep 16 00:35:20 2014 +From: paulo.ferraz.oliveira at gmail.com (Paulo F. Oliveira) +Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:35:20 +0100 +Subject: [99s-extend] Using cowboy_req:body more than once per request +In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> +References: <CA+dV7cT+POGJM=nqBcvnP_NoZUa=_ZHjGx-9gBQ+09Pe7aE2bg@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <CA+dV7cSQc=3wsQrYkg2p6R9M7n_HmZpF6kOt=4CbaphUUx4oGQ@mail.gmail.com> + +Hi. + +> It seems a bit weird to me to read the body and validate it before validating the request itself. + +It certainly seems like it, but I had no immediate solution and +instead of changing a dozen handlers, this seemed faster to implement +:D. I don't understand what you mean by "validating the request +itself". I read the header (I mentioned previously) and the body and +check one against the other. They are present and enough for the +_validator_ to make a decision, but I might be missing something here. + +> I would explicitly put these checks in the handler directly. This of course means that there is no need to read it twice anymore. + +I've been trying to find a way to easily share code between handlers +without having to rewrite a lot of code (even if I do decide to put +things in a library function - or several). I recently came across +https://github.com/opscode/mixer. Have you ever used it? + +Thanks. + +- Paulo F. Oliveira + +From essen at ninenines.eu Tue Sep 16 00:42:20 2014 +From: essen at ninenines.eu (=?UTF-8?B?TG/Dr2MgSG9ndWlu?=) +Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:42:20 +0200 +Subject: [99s-extend] Using cowboy_req:body more than once per request +In-Reply-To: <CA+dV7cSQc=3wsQrYkg2p6R9M7n_HmZpF6kOt=4CbaphUUx4oGQ@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CA+dV7cT+POGJM=nqBcvnP_NoZUa=_ZHjGx-9gBQ+09Pe7aE2bg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> + <CA+dV7cSQc=3wsQrYkg2p6R9M7n_HmZpF6kOt=4CbaphUUx4oGQ@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <[email protected]> + +On 09/16/2014 12:35 AM, Paulo F. Oliveira wrote: +> Hi. +> +>> It seems a bit weird to me to read the body and validate it before validating the request itself. +> +> It certainly seems like it, but I had no immediate solution and +> instead of changing a dozen handlers, this seemed faster to implement +> :D. I don't understand what you mean by "validating the request +> itself". I read the header (I mentioned previously) and the body and +> check one against the other. They are present and enough for the +> _validator_ to make a decision, but I might be missing something here. + +Like, is it the right method? Are the bindings/qs parameters/headers +present and valid? And so on. The body should be the last thing you +check, due to how expensive it can be, not the first. + +>> I would explicitly put these checks in the handler directly. This of course means that there is no need to read it twice anymore. +> +> I've been trying to find a way to easily share code between handlers +> without having to rewrite a lot of code (even if I do decide to put +> things in a library function - or several). I recently came across +> https://github.com/opscode/mixer. Have you ever used it? + +I usually share code by writing functions. Then I call these functions +where needed. + +-- +Lo?c Hoguin +http://ninenines.eu + +From jmrepetti at gmail.com Mon Sep 29 18:52:16 2014 +From: jmrepetti at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?SnVhbiBNYXTDrWFz?=) +Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:52:16 +0200 +Subject: [99s-extend] Newbie, Cowboy + Websocket + Audio Recording +Message-ID: <CA+ycm=6T4gu=48=VfP3aiVdJFAg--s+xGaT2RtGm1KU8qyLiTw@mail.gmail.com> + +Hello list, I hope this is the right place to ask this. + +I'm learning Erlang, and I wanted to create a Cowboy app to record audio +from a web browser. + +Based on the websocket example in the Cowboy source code, I get the user +mic input and send this input to the websocket. + +I created a "recorder" module, which functionality is to save the data to +the a file. + + +*#rawe_handler.erl*-module(rawec_handler). +-behaviour(cowboy_websocket_handler). +...... +init(_, _, _) -> + case whereis(recorder) of + undefined -> + RecorderPid = recorder:start(), + register(recorder, RecorderPid); + _ -> ok + end, + {upgrade, protocol, cowboy_websocket}. +..... +websocket_handle(_Frame, Req, State) -> + RecorderPid = whereis(recorder), + RecorderPid ! {rec, _Frame/binary}, + {ok, Req, State}. + +*#recorder.erl* +-module(recorder). + +-export([start/0, recorder_fun/1]). +-compile([debug_info]). + +recorder_fun(IoDevice) -> + receive + {rec, Data} -> + ok = file:write(IoDevice, Data), + io:format(Data), + recorder_fun(IoDevice); + {stop, _} -> + %%Close file + file:close(IoDevice) + end. + +start() -> + {ok, IoDevice} = file:open("/tmp/test_binary.wav", [write, +binary]), + spawn(recorder, recorder_fun, [IoDevice]). + + +When I start the console, and allow the microphone on the browser, I see +this error on the console: + +=ERROR REPORT==== 29-Sep-2014::18:13:03 === +Ranch listener http had connection process started with +cowboy_protocol:start_link/4 at <0.178.0> exit with reason: +*{[{reason,badarith},{mfa,{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3*}},{stacktrace,[{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3,[{file,"src/rawec_handler.erl"},{line,35}]},{cowboy_websocket,handler_call,7,[{file,"src/cowboy_websocket.erl"},{line,588}]},{cowboy_protocol,execute,4,[{file,"src/cowboy_protocol.erl"},{line,435}]}]},{msg,{binary,<<0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0....(ETC, +DATA STREAM CONTINUES) + +Probably my approach to do this is totally wrong. I there any obvious +problem here? +Can someone point me to a right direction?. Maybe I should write directly +to a file in the *websocket_handle *funcion, but how can I keep a file +opened during the streaming? + +The github repo is here: https://github.com/jmrepetti/rawec with the whole +source code if you want to take a look. + + +Thanks in advance, +Matias. +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140929/84fe21a4/attachment.html> + +From edgurgel at gmail.com Tue Sep 30 00:53:26 2014 +From: edgurgel at gmail.com (Eduardo Gurgel) +Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 11:53:26 +1300 +Subject: [99s-extend] Newbie, Cowboy + Websocket + Audio Recording +In-Reply-To: <CA+ycm=6T4gu=48=VfP3aiVdJFAg--s+xGaT2RtGm1KU8qyLiTw@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CA+ycm=6T4gu=48=VfP3aiVdJFAg--s+xGaT2RtGm1KU8qyLiTw@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <CAKAMJXghRnTZ1CTPkTBapOgh7BnFLUnvL++VVedyXuAzWT6HSQ@mail.gmail.com> + +Looking on the output it says: + +*{reason,badarith} *on this line: + +RecorderPid ! {rec, _Frame/binary}, + +This may help you somehow. + +BTW, variables starting with _ are usually used to show unused variables +and stop warnings from the compiler. + +On 30 September 2014 05:52, Juan Mat?as <jmrepetti at gmail.com> wrote: + +> Hello list, I hope this is the right place to ask this. +> +> I'm learning Erlang, and I wanted to create a Cowboy app to record audio +> from a web browser. +> +> Based on the websocket example in the Cowboy source code, I get the user +> mic input and send this input to the websocket. +> +> I created a "recorder" module, which functionality is to save the data to +> the a file. +> +> +> *#rawe_handler.erl*-module(rawec_handler). +> -behaviour(cowboy_websocket_handler). +> ...... +> init(_, _, _) -> +> case whereis(recorder) of +> undefined -> +> RecorderPid = recorder:start(), +> register(recorder, RecorderPid); +> _ -> ok +> end, +> {upgrade, protocol, cowboy_websocket}. +> ..... +> websocket_handle(_Frame, Req, State) -> +> RecorderPid = whereis(recorder), +> RecorderPid ! {rec, _Frame/binary}, +> {ok, Req, State}. +> +> *#recorder.erl* +> -module(recorder). +> +> -export([start/0, recorder_fun/1]). +> -compile([debug_info]). +> +> recorder_fun(IoDevice) -> +> receive +> {rec, Data} -> +> ok = file:write(IoDevice, Data), +> io:format(Data), +> recorder_fun(IoDevice); +> {stop, _} -> +> %%Close file +> file:close(IoDevice) +> end. +> +> start() -> +> {ok, IoDevice} = file:open("/tmp/test_binary.wav", [write, +> binary]), +> spawn(recorder, recorder_fun, [IoDevice]). +> +> +> When I start the console, and allow the microphone on the browser, I see +> this error on the console: +> +> =ERROR REPORT==== 29-Sep-2014::18:13:03 === +> Ranch listener http had connection process started with +> cowboy_protocol:start_link/4 at <0.178.0> exit with reason: +> *{[{reason,badarith},{mfa,{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3*}},{stacktrace,[{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3,[{file,"src/rawec_handler.erl"},{line,35}]},{cowboy_websocket,handler_call,7,[{file,"src/cowboy_websocket.erl"},{line,588}]},{cowboy_protocol,execute,4,[{file,"src/cowboy_protocol.erl"},{line,435}]}]},{msg,{binary,<<0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0....(ETC, +> DATA STREAM CONTINUES) +> +> Probably my approach to do this is totally wrong. I there any obvious +> problem here? +> Can someone point me to a right direction?. Maybe I should write directly +> to a file in the *websocket_handle *funcion, but how can I keep a file +> opened during the streaming? +> +> The github repo is here: https://github.com/jmrepetti/rawec with the +> whole source code if you want to take a look. +> +> +> Thanks in advance, +> Matias. +> +> _______________________________________________ +> Extend mailing list +> Extend at lists.ninenines.eu +> https://lists.ninenines.eu/listinfo/extend +> +> + + +-- +Eduardo +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140930/6d952ce6/attachment-0001.html> + +From jmrepetti at gmail.com Tue Sep 30 12:38:15 2014 +From: jmrepetti at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?SnVhbiBNYXTDrWFz?=) +Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:38:15 +0200 +Subject: [99s-extend] Newbie, Cowboy + Websocket + Audio Recording +In-Reply-To: <CAKAMJXghRnTZ1CTPkTBapOgh7BnFLUnvL++VVedyXuAzWT6HSQ@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CA+ycm=6T4gu=48=VfP3aiVdJFAg--s+xGaT2RtGm1KU8qyLiTw@mail.gmail.com> + <CAKAMJXghRnTZ1CTPkTBapOgh7BnFLUnvL++VVedyXuAzWT6HSQ@mail.gmail.com> +Message-ID: <CA+ycm=5YMMKFpZnfGrOBLu5Jn4WFAiX7BmwbKBti2YsVmJ5JjQ@mail.gmail.com> + +Thanks, that fixed the error. Now I'm having other but I'll investigate. + + + +On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Eduardo Gurgel <edgurgel at gmail.com> wrote: + +> Looking on the output it says: +> +> *{reason,badarith} *on this line: +> +> RecorderPid ! {rec, _Frame/binary}, +> +> This may help you somehow. +> +> BTW, variables starting with _ are usually used to show unused variables +> and stop warnings from the compiler. +> +> On 30 September 2014 05:52, Juan Mat?as <jmrepetti at gmail.com> wrote: +> +>> Hello list, I hope this is the right place to ask this. +>> +>> I'm learning Erlang, and I wanted to create a Cowboy app to record audio +>> from a web browser. +>> +>> Based on the websocket example in the Cowboy source code, I get the user +>> mic input and send this input to the websocket. +>> +>> I created a "recorder" module, which functionality is to save the data to +>> the a file. +>> +>> +>> *#rawe_handler.erl*-module(rawec_handler). +>> -behaviour(cowboy_websocket_handler). +>> ...... +>> init(_, _, _) -> +>> case whereis(recorder) of +>> undefined -> +>> RecorderPid = recorder:start(), +>> register(recorder, RecorderPid); +>> _ -> ok +>> end, +>> {upgrade, protocol, cowboy_websocket}. +>> ..... +>> websocket_handle(_Frame, Req, State) -> +>> RecorderPid = whereis(recorder), +>> RecorderPid ! {rec, _Frame/binary}, +>> {ok, Req, State}. +>> +>> *#recorder.erl* +>> -module(recorder). +>> +>> -export([start/0, recorder_fun/1]). +>> -compile([debug_info]). +>> +>> recorder_fun(IoDevice) -> +>> receive +>> {rec, Data} -> +>> ok = file:write(IoDevice, Data), +>> io:format(Data), +>> recorder_fun(IoDevice); +>> {stop, _} -> +>> %%Close file +>> file:close(IoDevice) +>> end. +>> +>> start() -> +>> {ok, IoDevice} = file:open("/tmp/test_binary.wav", [write, +>> binary]), +>> spawn(recorder, recorder_fun, [IoDevice]). +>> +>> +>> When I start the console, and allow the microphone on the browser, I see +>> this error on the console: +>> +>> =ERROR REPORT==== 29-Sep-2014::18:13:03 === +>> Ranch listener http had connection process started with +>> cowboy_protocol:start_link/4 at <0.178.0> exit with reason: +>> *{[{reason,badarith},{mfa,{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3*}},{stacktrace,[{rawec_handler,websocket_handle,3,[{file,"src/rawec_handler.erl"},{line,35}]},{cowboy_websocket,handler_call,7,[{file,"src/cowboy_websocket.erl"},{line,588}]},{cowboy_protocol,execute,4,[{file,"src/cowboy_protocol.erl"},{line,435}]}]},{msg,{binary,<<0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0....(ETC, +>> DATA STREAM CONTINUES) +>> +>> Probably my approach to do this is totally wrong. I there any obvious +>> problem here? +>> Can someone point me to a right direction?. Maybe I should write directly +>> to a file in the *websocket_handle *funcion, but how can I keep a file +>> opened during the streaming? +>> +>> The github repo is here: https://github.com/jmrepetti/rawec with the +>> whole source code if you want to take a look. +>> +>> +>> Thanks in advance, +>> Matias. +>> +>> _______________________________________________ +>> Extend mailing list +>> Extend at lists.ninenines.eu +>> https://lists.ninenines.eu/listinfo/extend +>> +>> +> +> +> -- +> Eduardo +> + + + +-- +Mat?as +-------------- next part -------------- +An HTML attachment was scrubbed... +URL: <http://lists.ninenines.eu/archives/extend/attachments/20140930/ef46837f/attachment.html> + |