>> You see, Rebol has nothing >> natively that can provide access to any DB or XML, so it seems to be >> quite >> a self contained/isolated world. >> >> >> People have somewhat resolved this problems, but I see that using >> complex > >> 3rd part scripts to access a DB is somewhat a drawback with respect >> having >> it natively integrated/supported. >> The same goes for XML parsing and building features. >> >> >> > but now I have to object. What is si complex about mySQL protocol? 10KB? > Yes, it is third party, but excuse me - when in python or perl - aren't > their even more general functions in separate modules you have to > include/load/call/whatever? I do'nt see anything complex about "do > %my-sql.r" at all ;-)
Yeah, it's a subtle thing, but I would like to see native optimized functions to access DB and do XML parsing/building. 3rd party libraries, how good they can be written, keep getting interpreted which is a disavantage IMHO. > /Command version contains direct mySQL access, but maybe DocKimble could > compress his mysql.r into binary format, so you would not see its > internals and only API would be left for you, which is plain simple - > open, insert, copy, close :-) See above. That's whay I would also like to see soon a mod for Apache instead of having to constantly call Rebol interpreter for doing CGI. > OK, I think I know what you consider being a trouble - such third party > tools don't use unified way to certain areas which we try to address. > That is why I asked for thing as Uniserve - multi-protocol plug-in > architecture, so that ppl would not have to start over and over again > building their protocols from scratch. I think Maarten tried to address > that by some rebol library - the best scripts put into some toolset, > which could be used by many .... other thing may be Maxim's Slim - > module system - Robert asked us to try that on AltME world, and I will - > maybe it can solve some dependency problems etc. > > The problem with Rebol community is, that each of us uses some slightly > different aproach, and that we can't somehow agree upon some "standard", > where others would use it and build upon it ... > >>> >> >> No, I was speaking about the free Core version, which is the tools I >> have >> been using since the beginning. I have not real use of View or Windows >> only dll access features. >> >> > Windows only? I may not understand ... under Linux you get access to .so > libraries of course. But maybe you mean lack of real virtual machine in > rebol for real cross platform code? Yes, that's what I meant. Using external calls as they are now makes the main advantage of rebol (portability) useless. I like to use whatever is provided integrated in the interpreter which I think as optimized in speed/memory usage and is always available. M&F -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
