Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[Jesse Sng]

She began talking about how I might help with the design, but that 
of course when the design was finished a software firm would take 
over the development (presumably in some 'real' language like C).  I 
didn't bother to tell her I COULD write in C, Java, PERL, PHP and so 
on, because it would be extraordinarily painful to do so.


Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it 
written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as 
a 'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)


What I do is I make it clear that if they want me to do something, 
then they are hiring me to produce something for them and the final 
program is merely the deliverable.


I do point that I am proficient in over half a dozen languages and 
operating systems but it is still my *time* that they end up paying 
for and my choice of development language and operating system has to 
do with my *productivity* which equates to time savings.


I then offer to quote to do it in some other language (or OS) if they 
like and usually that amount is about 2X what we were previously 
negotiating at. I also remind them at that point the maintenane costs 
would be higher and that it would require lots of billable training 
before I can hand the stuff over to one of their staff should they 
want to take over the entire project at some point.


Usually they'll back off. That happened about 18 months ago because 
some new IT 'expert' came into the company and wanted to move 
everything to a Windows only environment and it meant that 
fundamentally changing the way some things were done in that 
particular system and was going to pose to be a real hassle 
especially mid way into the whole project.


My rationale is simple, it takes me more time, the hassle factor is 
higher and in certain situations, my maintenance costs (which will be 
passed down to the client) is also much higher. So ultimately the 
price tag becomes the deterrent.


In the Hypercard days, we were able to show by way of full scale 
demos of actual working apps that our 'toy' language version worked 
better than the 'real' language stuff that some other competitors 
were doing.


Only once did a client (in 1990) actually ask for it to be faster and 
that was only after we had gone through lots of prototyping and had a 
finished app and in those days, we didn't have too many more 
optimizations left that we could do. At that point I fired up 
Prototyper to generate the code for the UI and rewrote the whole 
thing in Object Pascal in under 2 weeks and yes, it did work much 
faster.


I've always found such questions odd and especially since they are 
based more on perception than anything else. Afterall, there was a 
time when PERL, PHP and Java were not considered 'real' languages 
since the prevailing 'wisdom' at the time was that you can't do 
'real' work in an interpreted or bytecode based language and that 
real men only wrote in Assembly and that the really brave men coded 
directly in "1s" and "0s" (reminds me of a Dilbert episode).


It is possible that question is used as a way to determine (very 
superficially) who macho a developer you are based on the language 
that you use. Its like the old days when management promoted a 
programmer based on how many more lines of code he produced than the 
other guy.



Jesse Sng
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[George C Brackett]

Oops.  ...I shall take up the issue of language and explore it with  
the client in more detail.  What struck me...

George

On Dec 24, 2008, at 10:22 AM, George C Brackett wrote:

Very good questions, Peter.  It was a short meeting and we weren't  
talking about an actual proposal, just a future possibility with even  
that a bit hazy as to requirements.  If we ever get down to a solid  
project, I shall What struck me most was the apparent dismissal of a  
language out of hand.


As for what I would do were I hiring a consultant (as I have done in  
the past), the most important thing to me is not the means the  
consultant might use, but his/her reputation as a capable  
professional, and his/her assurances that my specifications (including  
perhaps a measure of maintainability) can be met.  That might be  
unprofessional of me, I suppose, but so far it's worked.  It aligns  
with an attitude I have about management: hire wisely through  
recommendation and prior accomplishment, clearly specify the goals  
desired, and keep an eye on the work while avoiding interference as  
much as possible.


George

On Dec 23, 2008, at 2:22 AM, Peter Alcibiades wrote:


It still sounds as if you're failing to probe the question/objection,  
and it
will be impossible to answer it unless you find out exactly what it  
is.  Is
it support?  Is it a concern about robustness?  Is it a matter of  
internal
company policy?  What were they expecting it to be written in?  C?   
Python?

Perl? VB? It will take different things in each case to answer it.

Imagine someone is delivering a proposal to a company you work for,  
and when

asked exactly that same question, replies, it will be written in Scheme.
She goes on to explain that she is more productive in Scheme than any  
other
language, she can deliver cross platform apps of the sort you are  
asking for

in a tenth of the time, and she offers to do an instant demo for you of
something that would take several hours in C, in about 10 minutes.

What do you say to her, and what do you think, and what do you say to  
your

colleagues when you talk to them about it?
--
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/OT2%3A-The-%27realness%27-of-languages-tp21129752p21140632.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[George C Brackett]

As you can see from my just-written message, I do agree with you,  
Viktoras!  As for C/C++ mania, I think that language has gotten into  
the mainstream vocabulary here in the US at least.  The others you  
mention are not as well-known except possibly for Java.  I'm glad  
European clients appear more indifferent to such details as language!


George

On Dec 23, 2008, at 5:24 AM, viktoras didziulis wrote:

in this situation I would ask to show a portfolio CD or examples of  
software created by the person - the most important thing being  
experience and ability to complete a product in whatever language the  
person feels most comfortable.


I guess it would be also fair to say that GUI will be created using  
Revolution RAD and definitely one can expand it with modules written  
in C++/C.


BTW correct me please, this may be wrong impression, but it looks like  
C++/C adoration is something specific to the USA, isn't it? I know  
many IT companies in my country and elsewhere in Europe who "do not do  
C" and deliver their products (accounting systems, research software,  
etc...) in Delphi, Java, Abap and the fact that they "do not do C"  
seems having zero impact on their successful businesses...


Best wishes!
Viktoras

Peter Alcibiades wrote:
It still sounds as if you're failing to probe the question/ 
objection, and it
will be impossible to answer it unless you find out exactly what it  
is.  Is
it support?  Is it a concern about robustness?  Is it a matter of  
internal
company policy?  What were they expecting it to be written in?  C?   
Python? Perl? VB? It will take different things in each case to  
answer it.


Imagine someone is delivering a proposal to a company you work for,  
and when
asked exactly that same question, replies, it will be written in  
Scheme. She goes on to explain that she is more productive in Scheme  
than any other
language, she can deliver cross platform apps of the sort you are  
asking for
in a tenth of the time, and she offers to do an instant demo for you  
of

something that would take several hours in C, in about 10 minutes.

What do you say to her, and what do you think, and what do you say  
to your

colleagues when you talk to them about it?



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[George C Brackett]

Very good questions, Peter.  It was a short meeting and we weren't  
talking about an actual proposal, just a future possibility with even  
that a bit hazy as to requirements.  If we ever get down to a solid  
project, I shall What struck me most was the apparent dismissal of a  
language out of hand.


As for what I would do were I hiring a consultant (as I have done in  
the past), the most important thing to me is not the means the  
consultant might use, but his/her reputation as a capable  
professional, and his/her assurances that my specifications (including  
perhaps a measure of maintainability) can be met.  That might be  
unprofessional of me, I suppose, but so far it's worked.  It aligns  
with an attitude I have about management: hire wisely through  
recommendation and prior accomplishment, clearly specify the goals  
desired, and keep an eye on the work while avoiding interference as  
much as possible.


George

On Dec 23, 2008, at 2:22 AM, Peter Alcibiades wrote:


It still sounds as if you're failing to probe the question/objection,  
and it
will be impossible to answer it unless you find out exactly what it  
is.  Is
it support?  Is it a concern about robustness?  Is it a matter of  
internal
company policy?  What were they expecting it to be written in?  C?   
Python?

Perl? VB? It will take different things in each case to answer it.

Imagine someone is delivering a proposal to a company you work for,  
and when

asked exactly that same question, replies, it will be written in Scheme.
She goes on to explain that she is more productive in Scheme than any  
other
language, she can deliver cross platform apps of the sort you are  
asking for

in a tenth of the time, and she offers to do an instant demo for you of
something that would take several hours in C, in about 10 minutes.

What do you say to her, and what do you think, and what do you say to  
your

colleagues when you talk to them about it?
--
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/OT2%3A-The-%27realness%27-of-languages-tp21129752p21140632.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[viktoras didziulis]

in this situation I would ask to show a portfolio CD or examples of 
software created by the person - the most important thing being 
experience and ability to complete a product in whatever language the 
person feels most comfortable.


I guess it would be also fair to say that GUI will be created using 
Revolution RAD and definitely one can expand it with modules written in 
C++/C.


BTW correct me please, this may be wrong impression, but it looks like 
C++/C adoration is something specific to the USA, isn't it? I know many 
IT companies in my country and elsewhere in Europe who "do not do C" and 
deliver their products (accounting systems, research software, etc...) 
in Delphi, Java, Abap and the fact that they "do not do C" seems having 
zero impact on their successful businesses...


Best wishes!
Viktoras

Peter Alcibiades wrote:

It still sounds as if you're failing to probe the question/objection, and it
will be impossible to answer it unless you find out exactly what it is.  Is
it support?  Is it a concern about robustness?  Is it a matter of internal
company policy?  What were they expecting it to be written in?  C?  Python? 
Perl? VB? It will take different things in each case to answer it.


Imagine someone is delivering a proposal to a company you work for, and when
asked exactly that same question, replies, it will be written in Scheme. 
She goes on to explain that she is more productive in Scheme than any other

language, she can deliver cross platform apps of the sort you are asking for
in a tenth of the time, and she offers to do an instant demo for you of
something that would take several hours in C, in about 10 minutes.

What do you say to her, and what do you think, and what do you say to your
colleagues when you talk to them about it?
  


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[Peter Alcibiades]

It still sounds as if you're failing to probe the question/objection, and it
will be impossible to answer it unless you find out exactly what it is.  Is
it support?  Is it a concern about robustness?  Is it a matter of internal
company policy?  What were they expecting it to be written in?  C?  Python? 
Perl? VB? It will take different things in each case to answer it.

Imagine someone is delivering a proposal to a company you work for, and when
asked exactly that same question, replies, it will be written in Scheme. 
She goes on to explain that she is more productive in Scheme than any other
language, she can deliver cross platform apps of the sort you are asking for
in a tenth of the time, and she offers to do an instant demo for you of
something that would take several hours in C, in about 10 minutes.

What do you say to her, and what do you think, and what do you say to your
colleagues when you talk to them about it?
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/OT2%3A-The-%27realness%27-of-languages-tp21129752p21140632.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[DunbarX]

This is the same issue that went the rounds when HyperTalk came out twenty 
years ago. It wasn't a real language, it was a toy. It was not serious at all. 
And it had limitations, lord knows, so there was some merit to the argument.   
It made sense for private development, but only that. Even the fact that it 
was bundled with each Mac, itself considered a non-serious platform, crippled 
its acceptance into mainstream programming thinking.

It didn't matter that HC revolutionized software, or that it worked, except 
to hundreds of thousands of private developers, but even with us it was always 
a cult, and we were on the defensive, always. Revolution, being so much more 
powerful, tries to overcome this very same mind set by touting ease of use with 
no-limit capabilities. Big difference. But is this enough for smart human 
beings to see, and embrace?

It wasn't last time around. There are an awful lot of people who should have 
learned, and learned to love, HC that never even tried.


**
One site 
keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it 
now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&;
ncid=emlcntaolcom0025)
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[Richard Gaskin]

George C Brackett wrote:
...
Do you dodge the 'what is it written in' question? 


Never. Full disclosure makes for informed decisions.

How can we raise the profile of Revolution as a  
'real' language?


The same as with any issue managers face: specific measurable results.

I often refer to Rev as being similar to VB in terms of its productivity 
but with a much smaller and simpler install and which lets me target 
multiple platforms from a single code base.


For technically minded people, these articles sometimes help:

In Praise of Scripting:  Real Programming Pragmatism


Scripting: Higher Level Programming for the 21st Century


For the less technically minded, I show them reviews of my products and 
others made with Rev.


Either way, the bottom line is the bottom line:  Ultimately the only 
thing that matters is delivering features to end users.  Everything else 
is at best secondary, or even not really relevant at all from a business 
perspective.


It boils down to: "How many features can they deliver to end-users in 
the same number of programmer hours?"


Have them try this simple exercise, using any language and any framework 
they like:


   1. Build an application that lets the user choose a folder
  of images and displays them in a slideshow, with Forward
  and Backward buttons.

   2. Then make builds for OS X, Windows, and Linux.

In Rev, this will take just a few minutes.  In many other languages, and 
certainly in C, this will take a few hours - for each platform.


If the proposed app in question doesn't deal with images that may not be 
the best test, but it's usually not hard to come up with a modest sample 
case representative of what an app needs to do that shows off Rev's 
unusually high productivity.


If they find a tool that lets them deliver more features at lower cost 
than using Rev, they'd be fools not to use it.


But for the business-minded manager, the corollary is also true. :)


Features are where money comes from.
Where money goes is programmer hours.
The difference between the two determine what kind of car the owner drives.

Either way they get a bicycle.  If they make a really bad choice, it's 
their only vehicle.  If they make a really good choice, they get to keep 
their Mercedes in the garage while they take a month off touring Europe 
on a high-end alloy frame. :)



The great thing about recessions is that they force managers to return 
to business basics.  While calculating ROI often becomes something of a 
lost art during good years, in lean times there is no choice but to put 
ROI at the center of operational decisions, where it arguably should 
have been all the time.


Work with them to establish productivity measurements relevant to their 
proposed software, and let the best tool win.


If it's Rev, you have an expanded scope of work approved.
If it's not, you have a new tool to report back to us here about.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World
 Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
 Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[George C Brackett]

I too do 'rapid prototyping,' but I'm convinced that with Revolution  
I'm very much more productive than I ever was in the other languages  
I've used.  I'm curious, though, why you don't think Revolution is  
appropriate for 'the building' although it will do for 'the plan.'   
Frankly, the programs I write in Revolution are just as robust as the  
13 published  in educational software programs I wrote in languages  
varying from Applesoft Basic to Forth to various assembly languages to  
C to C++.  And I would far rather try to add a feature or fix a bug in  
Revolution than in those other languages!


My wife did point out the issue of maintenance, should I not be the  
maintainer (at 65, I should have a few years left though).  I agree  
with you that a programmer speaking another language should be able to  
do a conversion pretty easily.  But a client's concern about the  
possible need to convert is certainly legitimate.


Anyway, I'm happily prototyping in Revolution for a 'real' educational  
publisher, and they're happily playing with and learning from my 'not- 
ready-for-prime-time' prototypes, so the loss of the occasional client  
isn't an issue.  And as viktoras observed, Rev's capabilities are  
increasing all the time.  The advent of a Rev browser plugin will be  
particularly important for my work in education!


George

On Dec 22, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Randall Reetz wrote:

I use xtalk IDEs because i do "rapid"(?) prototyping.  I dont expect  
my projects to be the finished market facing product.  On the other  
hand, i sure wish there was a way to automatically dump an xtalk  
project into java or C or even flash.


Nobody expects an architect to build the building.  Nobody would want  
an architect to use a back hoe to design a building.  The real issue  
is efficiency of development.  If a person can do way more in an xtalk- 
man hour then (in some circumstances) a project can be built that  
would otherwise be too expensive to considder.  This is the sweetspot  
of the xtalk development market.  That rev provides cross platform  
distribution... That is the great leveler missing in many other rapid  
dev. tools.


Because xtalk is so english like, any good C or java programmer can do  
a line by line conversion without knowing xtalk itself.


randall
-Original Message-
From: "Stephen Barncard" 
To: "How to use Revolution" 
Sent: 12/22/2008 9:29 AM
Subject: Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages



After I told her I used Revolution for its rapid-development and
cross-platform capabilities, a subtle change occurred in the
conversation.
She began talking about how I might help with the design, but that
of course when the design was finished a software firm would take
over the development (presumably in some 'real' language like C).  I
didn't bother to tell her I COULD write in C, Java, PERL, PHP and so
on, because it would be extraordinarily painful to do so.


Why not tell her that then, if you felt you lost anyway? The only
answer to fight the myths is education.

This is similar to the 'loudness wars' in the music business, where
untrained amateur 'mastering' engineers and forced professionals are
making LOUD CDs, even though they know they're trampling the dynamics
and it makes the music worse.  Loud CDs use 'hypercompression' - not
data compression but audio compression in the digital realm, which is
at first interesting but eventually tedious to listen to. (think
Ricky Martin and Britany for extremes)
The myth is that these records sound 'better' on the radio, but they
really don't. But the myth really goes back to the vinyl days, that
had limitations: if it was cut too soft it would be enveloped in
noise. On the other hand there was a limit to how much time you could
put on a disc. Louder records were shorter in length, quieter were
longer.  That's why Miles Davis's 'In A Silent Way' is so quiet.
Almost an hour playing time!



Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it
written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as
a 'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)

George



--


stephen barncard
s a n  f r a n c i s c o
- - -  - - - - - - - - -



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

RE: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[Randall Reetz]

I use xtalk IDEs because i do "rapid"(?) prototyping.  I dont expect my 
projects to be the finished market facing product.  On the other hand, i sure 
wish there was a way to automatically dump an xtalk project into java or C or 
even flash. 

Nobody expects an architect to build the building.  Nobody would want an 
architect to use a back hoe to design a building.  The real issue is efficiency 
of development.  If a person can do way more in an xtalk-man hour then (in some 
circumstances) a project can be built that would otherwise be too expensive to 
considder.  This is the sweetspot of the xtalk development market.  That rev 
provides cross platform distribution... That is the great leveler missing in 
many other rapid dev. tools.

Because xtalk is so english like, any good C or java programmer can do a line 
by line conversion without knowing xtalk itself.

randall
-Original Message-
From: "Stephen Barncard" 
To: "How to use Revolution" 
Sent: 12/22/2008 9:29 AM
Subject: Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

>
>After I told her I used Revolution for its rapid-development and 
>cross-platform capabilities, a subtle change occurred in the 
>conversation.
>She began talking about how I might help with the design, but that 
>of course when the design was finished a software firm would take 
>over the development (presumably in some 'real' language like C).  I 
>didn't bother to tell her I COULD write in C, Java, PERL, PHP and so 
>on, because it would be extraordinarily painful to do so.

Why not tell her that then, if you felt you lost anyway? The only 
answer to fight the myths is education.

This is similar to the 'loudness wars' in the music business, where 
untrained amateur 'mastering' engineers and forced professionals are 
making LOUD CDs, even though they know they're trampling the dynamics 
and it makes the music worse.  Loud CDs use 'hypercompression' - not 
data compression but audio compression in the digital realm, which is 
at first interesting but eventually tedious to listen to. (think 
Ricky Martin and Britany for extremes)
The myth is that these records sound 'better' on the radio, but they 
really don't. But the myth really goes back to the vinyl days, that 
had limitations: if it was cut too soft it would be enveloped in 
noise. On the other hand there was a limit to how much time you could 
put on a disc. Louder records were shorter in length, quieter were 
longer.  That's why Miles Davis's 'In A Silent Way' is so quiet. 
Almost an hour playing time!

>
>Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it 
>written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as 
>a 'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)
>
>George
>

-- 


stephen barncard
s a n  f r a n c i s c o
- - -  - - - - - - - - -



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[viktoras didziulis]

once Revolution collects the critical mass of developers and "well 
known" cross platform software products created with it, the transition 
should happen automagically. In general the situation is such that we 
have more than 50 other languages standing in front of Revolution if we 
sort them by popularity (www.tiobe.com), so the statistics is not on our 
side unless Revolution Ltd introduces something so valuable, so 
efficient, so universal (see list below) that everyone would not resist 
getting a copy of Rev...



I guess some people who explore potential of Revolution for their 
projects might dislike the following issues:
1) lack of hardware accelerated 3D engine (what if I wish to add a 
decent 3D visualization feature into my software, I will be stuck if I 
use Revolution..)
2) objects limited to GUI (I will not be able to create my own invisible 
object with its properties and use it in consistent manner like other 
objects of Revolution. e.g. set the height of object "myCube" or get the 
mass of object "Planet"). I am not speaking about complicated OOP here, 
just about lacking possibility to create simple non-GUI objects, not 
resorting to workarounds.
3) pixel by pixel image manipulation is slow, in Java one can create 
smooth animations by manipulating individual pixels in real-time, in 
Revolution it is still too slow.
4) can I easily use  library written in C/C++ ? No... I need to hire a 
C/C++ programmer to write a wrapper. Or C/C++/Revolution programmer 
which is yet more difficult to find. This inhibits the spread of 
Revolution. For example REXX language has The Generic Call Interface 
(GCI, http://rexx-gci.sourceforge.net/) which allows a REXX-only 
solution for calling external function packages without a wrapper 
library. Many would like a thing like this for Revolution.
5) syntax, well, at least Director folks say that popularity of Lingo 
increased once they introduced alternative dot syntax which requires 
less typing.


So, they might consider choosing Revolution if they are 100% sure they 
will never ever need smooth 3D graphics, direct image manipulation, own 
objects, external libraries and feel comfortable with its syntax. I 
still believe we will have those things in 5 years or so...


All the best!
Viktoras

George C Brackett wrote:

I'm wondering if this has happened to you:

I recently was talking with a prospective client about extending a 
program I wrote in Revolution for one school (the charter high school 
I helped found) to work with a group of schools sharing common 
interests.  My program has worked well on two platforms for four years 
(we're OS-agnostic), storing data on student behavior on a MySQL 
database accessed via internet, and displaying the data in a variety 
of ways (numeric, graphical, on the web) for teachers, students, 
families, and administrators.  Rev made it easy to write the program 
initially and to modify it as the requirements became clearer with use.


While demonstrating the program, the prospective client (who had made 
it clear to me that she had been involved with many software 
development projects before) asked what the program was written in.  
After I told her I used Revolution for its rapid-development and 
cross-platform capabilities, a subtle change occurred in the 
conversation.  She began talking about how I might help with the 
design, but that of course when the design was finished a software 
firm would take over the development (presumably in some 'real' 
language like C).  I didn't bother to tell her I COULD write in C, 
Java, PERL, PHP and so on, because it would be extraord inarily 
painful to do so.


Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it 
written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as a 
'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)


George

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Re: OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[Stephen Barncard]

After I told her I used Revolution for its rapid-development and 
cross-platform capabilities, a subtle change occurred in the 
conversation.
She began talking about how I might help with the design, but that 
of course when the design was finished a software firm would take 
over the development (presumably in some 'real' language like C).  I 
didn't bother to tell her I COULD write in C, Java, PERL, PHP and so 
on, because it would be extraordinarily painful to do so.


Why not tell her that then, if you felt you lost anyway? The only 
answer to fight the myths is education.


This is similar to the 'loudness wars' in the music business, where 
untrained amateur 'mastering' engineers and forced professionals are 
making LOUD CDs, even though they know they're trampling the dynamics 
and it makes the music worse.  Loud CDs use 'hypercompression' - not 
data compression but audio compression in the digital realm, which is 
at first interesting but eventually tedious to listen to. (think 
Ricky Martin and Britany for extremes)
The myth is that these records sound 'better' on the radio, but they 
really don't. But the myth really goes back to the vinyl days, that 
had limitations: if it was cut too soft it would be enveloped in 
noise. On the other hand there was a limit to how much time you could 
put on a disc. Louder records were shorter in length, quieter were 
longer.  That's why Miles Davis's 'In A Silent Way' is so quiet. 
Almost an hour playing time!




Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it 
written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as 
a 'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)


George



--


stephen barncard
s a n  f r a n c i s c o
- - -  - - - - - - - - -



___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

OT2: The 'realness' of languages

[George C Brackett]

I'm wondering if this has happened to you:

I recently was talking with a prospective client about extending a  
program I wrote in Revolution for one school (the charter high school  
I helped found) to work with a group of schools sharing common  
interests.  My program has worked well on two platforms for four years  
(we're OS-agnostic), storing data on student behavior on a MySQL  
database accessed via internet, and displaying the data in a variety  
of ways (numeric, graphical, on the web) for teachers, students,  
families, and administrators.  Rev made it easy to write the program  
initially and to modify it as the requirements became clearer with use.


While demonstrating the program, the prospective client (who had made  
it clear to me that she had been involved with many software  
development projects before) asked what the program was written in.   
After I told her I used Revolution for its rapid-development and cross- 
platform capabilities, a subtle change occurred in the conversation.   
She began talking about how I might help with the design, but that of  
course when the design was finished a software firm would take over  
the development (presumably in some 'real' language like C).  I didn't  
bother to tell her I COULD write in C, Java, PERL, PHP and so on,  
because it would be extraordinarily painful to do so.


Has anyone else run into this issue?  Do you dodge the 'what is it  
written in' question?  How can we raise the profile of Revolution as a  
'real' language?  (Never mind what religion it might resemble!)


George

___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution