Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Call for open-source project? Solution: Launch Programs from REBOL/View

From: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 28-Sep-2000 11:42

----- Original Message ----- From: <[dado--slovkaufring--sk]> To: <[list--rebol--com]> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 9:52 AM Subject: [REBOL] Solution: Launch Programs from REBOL/View Re:
> > Well imagine following: > > > > in pseudo-code: > > > > ftpcopy rebol to host x > > open telnetsession to host "x" > > run rebol on host "x" > > > > Do you see the possibilities? > > > > Regards > > Jochen > > You're right with this one, but then again, if rebol will be accessible on > the other side, you can/could execute your code in a more direct manner. > > We're talking about local execution here. I have no problem with executing > programs on other machines, with rebol or not, but be it rebol, it would > be much easier and simpler to implement. > > Regarding Elan's answer: > > > REBOL/Command gives you quite a lot of access to the OS (launching > > programs, > > redirecting program output to the console, loading libraries > > ...). What's wrong with paying for a program? ;-) > > I'm not against commercial software, but there have been many points and > questions already raised by Pekr. Not going into this... (again!?:) > > But what you're telling me is: if you want to execute an external program, > pay $250 for it. You know, I need a single system call! I like the > abilities that /Command gives you, but I don't need all this to do exec. > > I'm not saying you can't go with wrap-arounds, but WHY??? > > Imagine all the great networking code that's in REBoL would be there, but > there would be no "listen". You would be offered a /Network version for > just a $250 (cause, you know "listen", that's for servers, right?).
Jano, I am probably one who will pay for /Command, but you are right in one thing - the way it is (and other languages offer this as standard feature for free), we seem to end with numerous platform incompatible workarounds, small utils (gates listening on one side to rebol, executin/calling the stuff on another side), so the result will be much more bloat, chaos, whatever ... I was thinking about it for some time, if really RT don't want to move /Shell or /Library into /Core for free, what about open source project? We could probably implement multiplatform /Shell or even /Library ourselves. I know it would require us still to run separate util, but the aproach would be standard for all platform rebollers. I've never implemented C low level stuff, but hey - in Delphi league language calling external app is the case for just one line of code ('run in Visual Objects for e.g.). Doesn't realy seem worth some 250 USD. That's also reason why I suggested per component pricing. Maybe payint some 30USD for /Core + /Shell component would make most of us happy, if we don't need to pay for /Library or /ODBC at the same time .... But I don't think something is gonna change soon, so if some clever C coder would like to start such project, we could implement external util simulating /Shell or even /Library behavior ... PS: I think it should not be considered as a step against RT, I just think opposite - current state of things mean most of us will not probably buy the functionality for some > 250 USD. And it means current state of things is limiting REBOL usage and acceptance in computing world ... ... just a thought ... Cheers, -pekr-