BCHS stack – BSD, C, httpd, SQLite

Doing web development in c and getting that sweet performance boost is very tempting but the time it takes to develop even a simple website is just not worth it. I would rather spend a few pound extra on servers and goto the cinema than the hours of developer time it would take to build PHP sites in C++

Writing web-facing code in C in 2021 is seldomly a good idea, even if it runs on OpenBSD in a jail.

I&#x27;ve been ``statically&#x27;&#x27; compiling my php scripts to HTML. It&#x27;s marvelous.<p>My build system is a makefile, and it feels like I&#x27;m parodying myself and the entire industry.<p>Is this the same?

Replace C&#x2F;httpd with golang and you get a stack that&#x27;s fairly decent.

&gt; Wasn&#x27;t this site once funnier?<p>&gt; Yes. But some folks confused humour with levity.<p>Time to fire up the Wayback machine ;)

Our core business is served by an apache module written in C++. I don&#x27;t particularly like apache but writing an HTTP server from scratch is deceptively hard, especially in C. We took a quick look at nginx but found it hard to figure out. We also use microhttpd to give us an entrypoint where we can pull stats from small programs.

We write backend in C++ with http server builtin, so there is 1 forever running thread for all the requests and zero initialization time: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fintank.ru:8080&#x2F;s&#x2F;test" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fintank.ru:8080&#x2F;s&#x2F;test</a>

To answer questions so far (I&#x27;m the author of learnbhcs): yes, folks use BSD to host servers (if you want HTTP&#x2F;2, there&#x27;s nginx, etc.); kcgi interfaces with either CGI or FastCGI depending upon what the caller wants; yes, folks use this.

I guess forking a cgi-bin program for every request keeps memory leaks down.

Any one use open BSD to host servers?<p>Last time I checked httpd didn&#x27;t support http&#x2F;2.

Enjoyed doing FastCGI with this framework, but simple examples don&#x27;t present realistic complexity. Struggled with ways to create a small web app while maintaining simplicity similar to the examples provided (such as here - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;learnbchs.org&#x2F;easy.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;learnbchs.org&#x2F;easy.html</a> ) even though semantics wasn&#x27;t that different (present a form, after accepting data make a request, present a transformed result).

Makes me wonder what my stack would be abbreviated to. LAGS? (linux, apache, go, sqlite? Apache is optional. As is Linux.)

I totally get the geeky appeal of such a web development stack (a few years ago I could have chosen that for my personal web page, for fun). But in practice I doubt that it ends up a win in terms of security, maintainability, and development time.

Using a ARNP stack here (ArchLinux, Rust, nginx, PostgreSQL). It works great.

Check out the markup generation of this custom http server: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;caseymuratori.com&#x2F;blog_0034" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;caseymuratori.com&#x2F;blog_0034</a>

Just insert an `A` (maybe Assembly) after B, so that this becomes BACHS.<p>Has a nice ring to it. Maybe advertised as BACHS - a truly baroque stack

Does anyone actually use this?

Still very happy with my CHAMP-stack (CSS, HTML, Apache, MySQL and PHP).

Trying to make the term BCHS a thing just isn’t going to happen.