Script Limits vs dynamic programming

2003-08-14 Thread Dr. John R. Vokey
On Thursday, August 7, 2003 Jeanne A. E. DeVoto wrote: I don't understand what you mean by this. Your extensible stacks are your products. (Product does not mean commercial product, nor is it restricted to standalone applications.) It sounds from your description like your products would in fact

Re: Script Limits vs dynamic programming

2003-08-14 Thread Dar Scott
On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 04:31 PM, Dr. John R. Vokey wrote: Thus, rather being an essential part of metacard/RR, this dynamism becomes a feature *only* licensed users (developers?) can use, but can't retain in the stacks they produce. By all means, strip it out of standalones if need

Re: Script Limits vs dynamic programming

2003-08-14 Thread Robert Brenstein
This is missing the point. The principle advantage of metacard/RR is that it provides for dynamic programming *and* it does so in a cross-platform way. I have and use c, c++ compilers, Futurebasic, RealBasic, and so on, but for different purposes. None of these other programming

Re: Script Limits vs dynamic programming

2003-08-14 Thread David Bovill
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 22:31, Dr. John R. Vokey wrote: Thus, rather being an essential part of metacard/RR, this dynamism becomes a feature *only* licensed users (developers?) can use, but can't retain in the stacks they produce. for some, at least me, it is the dynamism that is my