[REBOL] Re: Google + SOAP
From: chris:langreiter at: 20-Apr-2002 17:49
> You're not comparing SOAP/XML to REBOL though, are you? That wouldn't
> seem to be a fruitful exercise. One is a protocol and
> meta-markup-language, and the other is a programming language. They're
> both good at what they do.
XML and the XML-related standards are basically a set of representational
constraints, as is every language. REBOL, when used purely as data
representation language (i.e. without any of its
non-declarative/procedural/functional capabilities), is indeed very similar
in capabilities to XML. What lacks, for example, is Unicode, but otherwise
you can most easily translate any piece of XML into a REBOL representation.
But I can do that as well with Java!
, you'll say, and right you are, after
all, that's the point of XML. However - and that is the critical point, IMO,
if you look at the REBOL representation and the Java object serialization
side-by-side, you'll see that while the resulting serialization is
practically incomprehensible to humans without tool support, the REBOL one
is actually simpler than the XML form we started with.
person [name "Chris" age 22]
BTW, at http://www.langreiter.com/rebol/google/ you can find a simple
wrapper around some functions the Google API provides, along with useful
features like result caching.
If you're interested in SOAP, you might also be interested in XML-RPC, which
is the simpler predecessor of SOAP (and avoids practically all of the
problems SOAP people have to cope with due to the higher level of
Carl, one question, however, remains: What is the "official RT way" to write
high-performance, concurrent servers in REBOL? (And no, Rugby is not an
option, because it blocks when executing long-running functions). I have
found no completely compelling way to do so yet.