I guess I am not completely convinced that the pluses outweigh the minuses regarding the Revolution binary format, but I will try to keep an open mind.
Some other reasons for text formats:
- managing groups of engineers: you can look at the nightly checkins to CVS and see how many lines of code have changed. Also can more easily find when and by whom a bug was injected and how to fix it.
- CVS puts a version code in the text based on triggers like $Id$ etc, which is very useful when managing various releases and finding which version of code you have. This would of course corrupt a .rev file. I have managed to get around this for many other tools (CAD programs, document programs) since most have an optional text mode, such as .rtf in Word. But they also frequently have bugs so the binary format is Truth, and the text mode is only close to the same. .rtf is pretty good, though. Revolution needs a pure text mode option, but only if it really works.
Since the .rev file is 95% the Transcript code in pure text form, I am not convinced of the speed of loading issue. One eye blink or two? Were it tokenized, as Basic did once long ago, I might be more convinced.
In general, binary source code formats are the bane of the Linux world.
-Steve
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
