[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Although I currently don't have the need to do this, I
> am wondering how best to perform a /Command function
> from /View.

Hmm, as /Command functionality is something we will be probably pay some
money for, the question is just reverse - how to get /View functionality
into /Command. What's really sad is I could find my emails maybe more
than two months old asking such "simple" question, but got no answer yet
...

>  For instance, let's say I have a /View app
> that is working great but I really need the Win32 version
> to access the Registry when an edit box is filled.

Hmm, if you just need registry access, there are some functions exposed
to /View user IIRC, but we were told it's temporarily solution? Type
'what in your console and look at the list. It was/is there because of
installer script ...

> No problem - just use /Command, BUT how would I *spawn* the
> /Command exe from /View and get a result?

As I told above - use reverse aproach, spawn your /View process from
/Command and connect them via sockets/files if you need one talking to
each other. I know it's a kludgy solution, but the only one coming to my
mind at current state of rebol evolution ...

>  And even if you
> could do this it's a lot of overhead for such a simple function.
>
> Does RT have a suggestion for situations like this?  Will
> there be a /ViewCommand or will the functionality be split
> into shared libraries?

Hmm, the topic was discussed very heavily on Ally list, as well as here
on public list. No reaction of RT folsk so far ... But I can bet a beer
we will not get it, at least not anytime soon, as according to rebol
website it seems RT has some marketing goals currently in mind ...
Maybe we will see some change later. I just don't understand the silence
of RT here, as its their product, they can do anything they want with
it, but me think some of us would prefer to know, what we will get in
the regard of modularity as time flies by and some of us can feel the
need to make some decisions, right? ;-)

-pekr-

> TIA,
>
> Rodney

Reply via email to