Hi All:
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, right? In terms
of OS interfaces (As I see it, anyway) Macintosh followed Amiga's
lead (and I think Carl S. was in on that). Windows followed Macintosh,
and Linux followed Windows.
Having said that, look at Python: With Python, you can both
call other programs from the script, AND you can imbed the
script in C/C++ by linking in Python Libraries.
As a C/C++ programmer, I would guess that there would be some
hurdles to overcome with multiple platforms as targets to implement
system calls in Rebol.
Looking at the reverse: that is imbedding Rebol in C/C++ (I can
only comment on this medium, not other languages).
If the necessary resources were provided, it shouldn't be too
difficult to arrange for a rebol library to be linked into a C
executable. And I don't think then, that it would be too difficult
to make the first step a very simple interface like so:
use_rebol(char* rebol_syntax_string);
//and overloading in C++
use_rebol(char* rebol_syntax_string, char* simple_data_string);
OR use_rebol(int number_of_args,............/*variable argument list*/)
// etc....
The implementation would be VERY simple, and definitely limited,
but it would be a first step, and wouldn't have to be made obsolete
by later enhancements.
Even at that very simple first step, I could see an easier implementation
of ftp, cgi, and email than the components provided to me by Borland.
(And Borland CGI services are available to the programmer only with a VERY
expensive "interprise" version.
By overlaying the code with the preprocessor, one could then create any number
of very powerful calls with very brief coding.
As cesar state quite correctly resolving datastructure would be somewhat
more complicated, but doable.
On a related note, I have seen comments about databases: And I do a lot of
CGI database programming. Let me put in a plug here:
I recently purchased the Mix C/Database Library, it is available for differnt
Windows modes, as well as for Linux. And is very complete and powerful.
Now I don't pretend to advise rebol
as to purchasing someone else's work or joint ventures, but if I could find
a way to compile rebol's core with Mix's database libraries, I would be
one VERY happy camper.
Just a thought.
Thanks for listening
Tim
At 09:22 AM 2/10/00 -0600, you wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> And what do you think about a Rebol extension language tool?
>>
>
>I think Rebol would make a fine extension language. The major problem all
>extension language integrators face is how to glue to language to the
>application's core datastructures. Series are a simple yet obviously
powerful
>abstraction; RT has given us ample examples of how to bridge that
abstraction to
>a variety of problem domains with their tight integration of series and
various
>network protocols. I suspect that a thoughtful way to wrap host-app
>datastructures up in series would in a natural way lead to very
expressive, very
>tight extension code.
>
>$0.02,
>
>jb
>
>>
>> thanks /cesar
>
>
