Using ZeroMQ for cross platform development?

Question

We have a large console application in Haskell that I have been charged with making cross platform and adding a gui.

The requirements are:

1. Native-as-possible look and feel.
2. Clients for Windows and Mac OS X, Linux if possible.
3. No separate runtime to install.
4. No required network communication. The haskell code deals with very sensitive information that cannot be transmitted over the wire. This is really the only reason this isn't a web application.

Now, the real reason for this question is to explain one solution I'm researching at the moment and to solicit for reasons that I'm not thinking of that make this a bad idea.

My solution is a native gui. Winforms on Windows, Cocoa on Mac OS X, and GTK/Glade on Linux, that simply handles the presentation. Then I would write a layer on top of the Haskell code that turns it into a responder for messages to and from the UI using ZeroMQ to handle the messages and maybe protobufs for serializing the data back and forth. So the native application would start which would itself start the daemon where all of the magic happens, and send messages back and forth.

Aside from making sure that the daemon only accepts connections from the application that started it, and the challenge of providing the right data back and forth for advanced gui elements (I'm thinking table views, cells, etc.), I don't see many downsides to this.

What am I not thinking about that makes this a bad idea?

I should probably mention that at first glance I was going to go with GTK on all platforms. The problem is that, while it's close, and GTK and Glade support for Haskell is nice to work with, the result doesn't look 'right'. It's close, but just not native enough in subtle ways which make that solution unacceptable to the people who happen to be writing the check for this work.

Also, the issue of multiple platforms and thus multiple languages for the gui isn't a problem so I'm not necessarily looking for other ways to solve that problem unless it simplifies something about the interop with the haskell code.

Answer 1

Then I would write a layer on top of the Haskell code that turns it into a responder for messages to and from the UI using ZeroMQ to handle the messages and maybe protobufs for serializing the data back and forth.

I think this is reasonable (a client/server model, where the client just happens to be a native look-n-feel desktop app). (I have no strong view about protobufs versus e.g. JSON, thrift).

The Haskell zeromq bindings are getting some use now, too.

What am I not thinking about that makes this a bad idea?

How well tested is zeromq on Windows and Mac? It is probably fine, but something I'd check.

The problem is that, while it's close, and GTK and Glade support for Haskell is nice to work with, the result doesn't look 'right'.

Does the integration package help there?

Answer 2

Here's an interesting possibility: wai-handler-webkit. It essentially packages up QtWebkit with the Warp web server to make your web apps deployable. It hasn't seen intensive use, has never been tested on Mac, and is tricky to compile on Windows, but it's a fairly straight-forward approach that lets you use the fairly rich web ecosystem developing in Haskell.

I'm likely going to be doing more development on it in the near future, so if you have interest in using it, let me know what extra features would be useful, as well as if you could offer any help on the Mac front in particular. I'm also not convinced that we need to stick with QtWebkit on all platforms: it might make more sense to use a different Webkit backend depending on OS, or maybe even using Gecko or (shudder) Trident instead.

Answer 3

I've had some problems getting zeromq to play nice with haskell on OSX (problems with looking for a dylib as opposed to an "o" I think). Protocol buffers and haskell seems to work fine though.

Answer 4

So your reason not to use a web application is because of sensitive nature of haskell program's output. And THAT's why you are distributing that same sensitive application that spews out unencrypted data on ALL client machines ? That does not make any sense.

If your application is sensitive you DEFINITELLY should put it on server and utilize strongest possible TLS.