[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi Petr,
>
> Thanks for carrying my simple question further... (I can only imagine the
> responses NOW!) heheh. Yes, that's a related, or extended, area of interest
> for me... I simply thought the question of DOS was a large enough leap to
> see what the "low end" intentions of REBOL were (and now we know at least
> current plans).
> While I concur that an O/S-less REBOL has merit, and also would agree that
> REBOL w/o TCP/IP could find many homes, personally I DO WANT TCP/IP in my
> version, for the types of devices I am considering. But this seems to gets
> back to the related thread of "modular REBOL" where one picks/chooses what
> is needed for a given application. Still an intriguing (though probably far
> fetched?) idea.
>
> Russ
Russ, do you mind me asking which 8-bit controller you have the TCP/IP
stack for?
The smallest I have worked with (which included client _and_ server
socket API)
is 42K of ROM for TCP/IP/SLIP. (PPP easily eats 50-100k)
Just last month I was looking for a TCP/IP stack for the HC12 from
Motorola,
the chip I would love to slip a stack into. My quick-under-pressure
search
came up dry except for a non-TCP/IP stack approach called emWare. Their
approach
has merit, but having the stack in a small 8-bit/16-bit MCU would flip
my dipper.
Your points in this thread I totally agree with in principle. I am
travelling there as fast as my available man-hours can take me...
Steve Shireman
Wouldn't a 'Stamp' Rebol board be cool?
