[REBOL] Real advancement? Re: Many Topics (was: Killer Application)
From: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 18-Aug-2002 9:57
[reffy--ulrich--net] wrote:
>My main interest now is in collaborative things. Multiuser spreadsheet is a simple example
where each cell(or group of cells) can be locked/shared, etc. I would like to extend
this concept down to the scalar item level (and maybe block in Rebol) so that some general
mechanisms can be put in place for developing applications for community/group use.
>
if you think in terms of A + user-on-nodeX/B = result, then Rebol does
not provide it to you automatically. As for distributed computing - the
best thing so far in Rebol is Rugby. It enables you to expose set of
functions, which should be available to you, once you connect. So you
call something like
get-rugby-service http://some-other-machine: port
and you get back list of functions (proxies), so you can call them like
they would sit right on your machine.
The best model I seen so far is QNX Rtp. It is fantastic - once machine
connects to their network, it just becomes part of kind of a cluster.
All low level system managers do it for you. So, if you call 'open
fileX, it's open, who will tell appropriate resource manager, it want
such file, and that resource manager scans all nodes automatically! The
result is - you don't have to adapt your app to network environment.
That's the coolest concept I seen so far, so I will not be satisfied,
unless I see it done in Rebol.
What we currently have is - ability to use various protocols and TCP
communication to handle connection, but no such stuff QNX offers. And
that's why I talked about starting with some framework, which would
allow us at least more automatic solutions - e.g. not having to build
client and server handling scripts each time we want to communicate via TCP.
The nearest thing to merge two machines/processes so far is - Rugby. But
to achieve QNX like behavior, we would need probably RT's assistance.
But once again - it would be nice to have some system/hooks item, where
other connected machines/processes would be registered, so e.g. simple
exists? fileX, would scan also those machines, without the need to
change single line of code ...
Well, enough of dreaming ....
>It might be the case that IOS already has some of these mechanisms in place, guess I
will somehow have to figure that out.
>
No, I think not in terms you think (of course, if I understand your
needs correctly). But yes, IOS is nice - it has nice message dialect
based synchronisation mechanism, where you can dynamically post or
remove handlers (callback functions), so you are notified once specific
condition is met ...
PS: Dick, what is your track record? Where do you come from, what is
your job, etc. Could you please a bit introduce yourself to us? :-)
Thanks ...
Cheers,
-pekr-
