[REBOL] Re: facts we will have to face ...
From: carl:cybercraft at: 24-Oct-2001 21:57
On 24-Oct-01, Robert M. Muench wrote:
> Hi, I might not understand the discussion.. .but why should Rebol be
> used for things it's not made for? I don't see a need to play MP3s,
> or movies.
I do, as I want to be able to write scripts that can play them with
just the press of a button. Also, I think you may be wrong when you
say it wasn't made to play them. I'm sure multi-media support's been
in REBOL's design specs from day one.
> If I need, I just use a MP3 player or movie player not a
> script language...
The same could be said for viewing images. But anyway, RT have
signalled they're going to support 3D and sound, so it is coming.
(When though's another matter.:)
> Did you ever see a farmer working with a Formula1 racing car in the
> fields? I didn't.
No, but I've seen plenty of tractor drivers wearing stereo headphones.
(:
> There is this old saying: Use the right tool for
> the job.
> I hope RT will balance wise what they put into the kernel and what
> not. I like the one-file approach and not to have to worry about
> libraries! This is a USP for Rebol IMO. Rebol should be kept small
> like it is and optimized not feature overloaed. Robert
I do too, but functionality's important as well, and if libraries
could get around problems like View's inability to save jpegs, (as
discussed in another recent thread), that'd be a good thing in my
opinion. REBOL/multimedia would then only need to directly support
one music format, one movie format and so on, with conversion to and
from other formats being done by the libraries when necessary.
--
Carl Read
