Chipp Walters wrote:
Y'know, it would be a cool idea to have a database of all the commercial and
enterprise apps written in Rev. That way one could point to the list and use
it as an example of what is and has been done with Rev in the past.
Yep. RunRev started one but it's pretty sparse, too sparse IMO to
really give folks a good appreciation for the size and breadth of the
community:
<http://www.runrev.com/products/testimonials/overview/>
I'll take this opportunity to remind folks here that if anyone wants to
take on this modest project I'd be happy to provide space at
revJournal.com for such a listing.
I don't have the time to manage it myself, but I think it would be
valuable and would provide access and URLs for anyone who wants to
devote a little time to putting it together.
Paul, I agree with you. Having Revolution as the company name, name of the
product and name of the language is quite confusing for many. I prefer using
Transcript.
Agreed, and I use "Transcript" as well.
When I get this question I usually describe it as a top-secret
competitive advantage, one that offers more productivity than anything
else I've worked with. :)
Making the new Apache module engine available for free will help
tremendously in evangelizing the language, arguably more so than the
browser plugin. It's hard to beat the grace of chunk expressions for
working with text, and whether HTML or JavaScript or CSS, most of the
web is just text.
This is a good description:
Many times I'll describe Rev as a 'Java-like' in that it runs on multiple
platforms, has a JIT compiler, but doesn't require runtime libraries and
therefore can be built into a standalone distributable application. I'll
also mention it's faster than Java and has been around as a stable
Amen to all of that.
I also very much liked Tom's:
Start with C++ then move to R++ and you've got Revolution....
Another might be:
It's what Visual Basic could have been if Microsoft wasn't high.
:)
Maybe this is taking the conversation in a direction it needn't go, but
I can't help but think that if Rev were open source it might well be one
of the dominant languages of our time, certainly beyond Ruby or even Python.
I should note than I'm not advocating that necessarily, and I understand
that given where RunRev is that doesn't appear to be a viable option.
But in terms of traction/reach/mindshare/frenzy, it would seem a much
simpler job of evangelizing the language if it were open source:
The toughest challenge I face in talking about it with potential clients
is that it's a sole-source proprietary system.
Short of going open source, what might one do to better communicate the
value of investing thousands of programmer hours in Rev?
Certainly the free Apache module will help, and a truly comprehensive
list of both commercial products and add-on components would also be
quite a boost.
What else could be done to make Rev as compelling for serious developers
as open source languages?
--
Richard Gaskin
Managing Editor, revJournal
_______________________________________________________
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
