[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 08:03 PM 1/19/00 +0100, you wrote:
> >Hi Elan,
> >
> >I choosed to comment on your post, if you don't mind :-)
>
> No, I don't mind.
>
> >
> >What's missing? Well, if you will look into REBOL system object structure,
> you
> >will find system/user/words and system/script/words fields. I think it was
> >Carl, who commented my questions, stating those fields will provide separate?
> >context and REBOL/Core should provide some functions, to make some words of
> >above mentioned context visible to global context, etc.
>
> Nice.
>
> >
> >It was also said adding the message port should be of no problem.
>
> Explain.
Well, it was Carl who stated it should be no problem to add message port to
system/ports. Look at system/ports/input and system/ports/output - it just
contains input and output ... What about system/ports/events or something like
that? I mean - each OS REBOL is running on top of, dispatches some events to REBOL
console, it's clear. So, what about exposing such events to above mentioned
/system/ports/events? You would be able to catch system events and act upon them
from REBOL script ... I hope I just understand correctly what Carl meant by "Amiga
like message ports" ....
> >> 2. For me the top priority at this point in time is REBOL/View. GUI access
> >> is IMHO by far the one item that will catapult REBOL forward the most.
> >>
> >
> >Yes,
>
> Yes!
>
> >but it's so sudden I am scared a little bit it about it :-)
>
> Oh, come on. Carl was in charge of Amiga OS, no? He does know how to
> implement GUIs, don't you think?
No :-) IIRC, Carl was responsible for Exec, devices model, library model, etc. -
gfx stuff was work of his good friend - RJ Mical.
> >I hope it will
> >be extensible in some way or at least it contains some nice primitives to
> build
> >own effects.
>
> They announced that the whole GUI subsystem will be delivere Open Source. I
> would expect that his will give you more than a few primitives. In MS
> Windows, GUI functionality means loading dlls. Possibly, REBOL/View will
> expose that code as part of the GUI subsystem, allowing us to perhaps load
> other dlls as well (just speculation on my part!).
>
> >I am interested in Scala Multimedia like effects, wipes. I hope
> >double buffered smooth scroolling is supported, as I don't buy jerkinness.
> >
>
> This is not part of the REBOL/View being discussed today. Multimedia
> extensions will follow later. REBOL/View in my understanding is limited to
> GUIs.
Hmm, then I don't understand the issue. I thought smooth scrolling, translucent
windows, alpha channels etc. have to be supported somewhere in the core of GUI
system, to build upon them. If it can be added later, no problem ...
> >> 3. Of course REBOL/Command continues to be a much expected version.
> >> Nevertheless, on my list it ranks below REBOL/View.
> >>
> >
> >Hmm, not sure. Look, I am on REBOL/Apache ML, and noone from REBOL Tech. was
> >willing to tell us to date - if /Apache is going to be based upon /Core or
> upon
> >/Command. If it is going to be based upon /Core, it is just joke,
>
> not true. It does what REBOL/Core does but faster and more stable.
>
> >and NOONE
> >will use it seriously without database support.
>
> Many CGI scripts do not require massive database support, i.e. database can
> be REBOL script.
>
> >Well, I will surely find some
> >usage for it - but it's me, reboller in heart. I talked to some friends using
> >some other solutions - without database support they will not spend even
> minute
> >looking at /Apache module.
>
> Some will, some won't.
>
Hmm, maybe newcomers to REBOL will. I asked my friends, present in web development
sphere. So I meant chances of REBOL/Apache to convert Apache/PHP or
Apache/any-other-language developers. If someone is used to use some concrete
solution, you have to offer him/her at least the same capabilities. Don't
depreciate conversion of current web developers please - we need them.
> >Also - I am interested in Toolkit version - embeddable into my own apps.
>
> What are you not interested in? Should REBOL Tech hold off on publishing
> anything now, because you are interested in everything? What is the point
> of raising demands from everything from REBOL/Command, Toolkit, Open
> Source, when REBOL Tech is about to release a major new product?
>
> >I am also still waiting for Netware version to look what can REBOL offer
> here,
> >as we have many Netware based servers here in our company.
>
> So, what are you saying? Don't publish REBOL/View because you want Netware
> version? Don't publish Netware version because you want toolkit? Don't
> publish toolkit because you want REBOL/Command? Don't publish REBOL/Command
> because you want REBOL/Core extensions? Don't publish REBOL/Core extensions
> because you want improved REBOL/Apache module? Don't publish REBOL/Apache
> module because you want Netware version ... Don't publish Netware version
> because you want REBOL/View?
>
> Why are you complaining about not being served a ham sandwich, pea soup, a
> hamburger, steak, curry rice and chili, when they are about to serve you a
> nice piece of cake with some delicious ice cream? What's going on here?
>
Elan, I choosed your post because there were so many posts in this thread, and I
found yours as best suiting my needs to express myself. I don't understand why are
you so picky on me here. I don't care of some 1) 2) 3) here. What I care about is
the public picture of the company - /Command was promissed for spring 1999
release. It WAS ANNOUNCED in some Sept/Oct/Nov 1999. 50 Platforms were promised
for the end of the year. REBOL website is not updated for so long. I think even
last update of their website is because I complained about it. REBOL/View was
never mentioned, but /Command /Browse /Media were mentioned in some of their
materials (http://www.rebol.com/whyrebol.html ). What's the problem to clearly
state if /Apache is going to be based upon /Core or /Command? Isn't that me who
should ask - what's going on here? Should commercial company announce things
before they are at least near the beta stage?
-pekr-
>
> ;- Elan >> [: - )]
