>Hi Mike, > >you wrote: >>My own preference is to get /COMMAND >>as soon as possible. > [snipped Thomspon Toolkit (it's still around?)] > >>especially >>reformatting data from many external >>sources for import to relational databases. > >I have been using REBOL/Core for that. Don't need REBOL/Command to reformat >data. > >>Increasingly, this external data is retrieved >>from the Internet. > >Here as well. Again REBOL/Core provides me with all necessary capabilities. > Points well taken. I neglected to mention the aspect of interacting with other processes, whether to "glue" existing apps together or just the ability to launch programs from a Rebol script. (I'm thinking /COMMAND is the right animal for this, or am I all wet ?) >>I've considered investing >>serious time becoming a proficient Perl >>programmer, but what a great thing it >>would be to accomplish most of what I >>need with Rebol /X's . > >I'd say you can go ahead and do it. And as a proficient Thompson Toolkit >programmer, you can even use the shell or awk to add the capabilities to >REBOL that will be supplied by REBOL/Command. I.e. use the shell or awk to >launch external programs, do whatever you want to do with external >programs, then use awk or shell to prepared data for REBOL and then finally >launch REBOL with the same shell/awk script. Not as elegant as using >REBOL/Command (I assume) but its doable. Without REBOL/View you can't use >REBOL to dynamically create GUIs, period. Big difference, seeing as you say Yes, but of course I want it all ! One of my biggest challenges in the coming year is to determine the best core tools (and people) to employ to get the productivity and responsiveness we need in a rapid application development sense, while building a highly understandable code base that is flexible and reusable. We constantly struggle with the need for knowledge workers to have tools which enable them to be highly productive, *without* being at the mercy of an IT staff that can't respond to fast changing circumstances. (Our company specializes in deregulated energy procurement, a world where the logistics of operations changes very fast indeed.) I want to avoid as much as possible the need to integrate too many languages and tools to get the job done, lest we have the fractured mass of technologies and specialized programming talent that are hurting our competitors. REBOL may provide a very wide and robust solution that in my mind becomes a "lingua franca" for many types of problem domains, where we need the benefit of s/w, but (hopefully) not s/w that only a precious few can understand and maintain. The expressibility of REBOL and its dialecting dimension are very compelling to me in this regard. But before I can make a serious commitment to REBOL, I need to see that the variety of REBOL /X flavors together are up to the task. Database connectivity is a big need as well. What I've reallly been thinking I'd love to do in my company is: -- achieve wide scale adoption of Linux as both servers and desktops -- employ REBOL /Xs as a means to automate and communicate business processes, creating a flexible, specialized competitive advantage and skill-set -- Ability to support remote offices through a browser interface to the internal technical resources of the corporate office. > >>The prospect of >>/VIEW (for me) is also appealing in that >>we could do some serious toolsmithing >>to empower the non-programmer types >>in our company as well. > >There you go. Consider what will be going on in your company, when you >programmer types can deliver fully GUI'd Internet enabled scripts to >non-programmer types! > >> >>I would really be interested in knowing >>how many people interested in Rebol >>are *truly* interested in an alternative >>to Perl, Tcl, or say Python out of the >>gate, vs. say Java / C++ / VB with a >>primary focus on Internet programming ? > >I think pretty much everyone will say both. Let's put an end to having to >learn and use different languages, >1. REBOL (Perl ...) to do Internet >2. Java, C++, VB, Delphi to do GUI >3. SQL to make an income. > >;- Elan >> [: - )] Amen to your last comment, Elan. Thanks for your thoughtful insights -- Mike Mastroianni
