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

Rebol for .NET

 [1/8] from: gchillemi:aliceposta:it at: 12-May-2004 12:46


Do you think that a REBOL for .NET would be possible ? It will surely open the door to any hardware which has a .NET framework available ! Giuseppe

 [2/8] from: karim:elfounas:easybraine at: 12-May-2004 18:26


The only hardware that run .NET is a PCx86 with Windows and, soon in the future, a Linux via Mono. A .Net interpreter/compiler of Rebol language will be less platform independent than the current one. It will also slow down the execution speed. I do not understand why it could be usefull as it. But maybe, a new set of instruction for interoperability could be interesting if it give more things than the usual dll access of view/pro and view/command. We will also lose the fast deployment of the actual less-than-1Meg rebol/view executable. -----Message d'origine----- De : [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] De la part de Giuseppe Chillemi Envoyé : mercredi 12 mai 2004 12:47 À : [rebol-list--rebol--com] Objet : [REBOL] Rebol for .NET Do you think that a REBOL for .NET would be possible ? It will surely open the door to any hardware which has a .NET framework available ! Giuseppe -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [rebol-request--rebol--com] with unsubscribe as the subject.

 [3/8] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 12-May-2004 11:27


Hi Giuseppe, GC> Do you think that a REBOL for .NET would be possible ? It will GC> surely open the door to any hardware which has a .NET framework GC> available ! It's very unlikely. .NET compiles down to an internal IL (Intermediate Language) to run on their VM; REBOL is purely interpreted. RT has mentioned in the past that it would be possible to create a compiler for a subset of REBOL (or maybe the whole language, not sure), but you would lose the dynamic aspect of REBOL. I think I'd rather have a native code compiler myself, and a good infrastructure for building REBOL apps that can talk to each other, and apps built in other languages. -- Gregg

 [4/8] from: pwawood:mango:my at: 13-May-2004 7:53


Isn't the real question about REBOL and .net as to when (rather than if) View/Pro.net will provide access to .net frameworks and the like? Peter On Thursday, May 13, 2004, at 01:27 Asia/Kuala_Lumpur, Gregg Irwin wrote:

 [5/8] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 12-May-2004 19:08


Hi Peter, PWW> Isn't the real question about REBOL and .net as to when (rather than PWW> if) View/Pro.net will provide access to .net frameworks and the like? I wouldn't think so, but I don't profess to know much. :) Universal interop mechanisms seem a better route for REBOL than more platform specific ties. Give me an easy, open, way to talk with .NET apps and I'll just write pieces in the most appropriate tool. -- Gregg

 [6/8] from: gchillemi:aliceposta:it at: 14-May-2004 9:57


Karim, I do not agree ! Using the .NET framework would open the opportunity to run an application on every kind of hardware supported by the framework. .NET runs on every Windows Desktop (XP, ME, 2000 ...) but it exists for Windows Mobile, Windows CE .NET devices and SmartPhones (althought in a reduced form). As employer of a company which develops for the mobile market I see how important is to embrace this market NOW. Mobile will have 3 digits expansion ratio each year in the following years. .NET is an the opportunity to remove many of the differences that cost a lot to companies that are implementing software solutions for different hardware platforms. Rebol Technologies would have the benefit of moving part of the development of Rebol over the companies which take care of maintaining the compatibility of the framework on different hardware. You can see by yourself how important is for everyone to focus on its core business. When I read on the Rebol FAQ that CE compatibility needs a financer, a sponsor I realize that my nice Rebol/View Pro is far from my reference market and far from the reference market of many companies. However I admit that technologies changes really often and we could have a Windows XP powered smartphone in a couple of years or a linux computer system for our cars. Until then I remain of my opinion that .NET is one of the solutions that guarantees the wider hardware base at the least cost. Giuseppe PS: A last note: slowdown is not an issue for a lot of Rebol applications which idle waiting for an input for the most of time... -----Messaggio originale----- Da: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] Per conto di Karim El Founas Inviato: mercoledì 12 maggio 2004 18.27 A: [rebol-list--rebol--com] Oggetto: [REBOL] RE : Rebol for .NET The only hardware that run .NET is a PCx86 with Windows and, soon in the future, a Linux via Mono. A .Net interpreter/compiler of Rebol language will be less platform independent than the current one. It will also slow down the execution speed. I do not understand why it could be usefull as it. But maybe, a new set of instruction for interoperability could be interesting if it give more things than the usual dll access of view/pro and view/command. We will also lose the fast deployment of the actual less-than-1Meg rebol/view executable. -----Message d'origine----- De : [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] De la part de Giuseppe Chillemi Envoyé : mercredi 12 mai 2004 12:47 À : [rebol-list--rebol--com] Objet : [REBOL] Rebol for .NET Do you think that a REBOL for .NET would be possible ? It will surely open the door to any hardware which has a .NET framework available ! Giuseppe

 [7/8] from: karim::elfounas::easybraine::com at: 14-May-2004 17:37


Hello Giuseppe, About the oppurtunity to use rebol application on Windows CE and Smartphone you're right. I didn't think about it in my response. I was also disappointed by he lack of good mobile platform support with Rebol. There are no PalmOS support even with the two new PalmOS releases wich are very powerfull. And, in this kind of project, the developper needs good librairies to use efficiently the particular things of these plaforms (Persistence in memory, connectivity, specific sounds and graphics,...) About running Rebol on Windows (with .Net) or Linux (with Mono), I still think the benefit will be smaller. But good librairies (in Rebol) to connect a Rebol script to usefull .Net dll or applications could be interresting. About the speed problem, I think that sometimes it can be important. I'm writting an client-server + SQL DB application in Rebol and the speed is important in my case (so many users). In this application, sometimes Rebol run faster than equivalent Java or Coldfusion routines. Even the SQL connexion (DocKimbel MySQL drive) is sometimes more efficient! CU Karim. -----Message d'origine----- De : [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] De la part de Giuseppe Chillemi Envoyé : vendredi 14 mai 2004 9:58 À : [rebol-list--rebol--com] Objet : [REBOL] RE : Rebol for .NET Karim, I do not agree ! Using the .NET framework would open the opportunity to run an application on every kind of hardware supported by the framework. .NET runs on every Windows Desktop (XP, ME, 2000 ...) but it exists for Windows Mobile, Windows CE .NET devices and SmartPhones (althought in a reduced form). As employer of a company which develops for the mobile market I see how important is to embrace this market NOW. Mobile will have 3 digits expansion ratio each year in the following years. .NET is an the opportunity to remove many of the differences that cost a lot to companies that are implementing software solutions for different hardware platforms. Rebol Technologies would have the benefit of moving part of the development of Rebol over the companies which take care of maintaining the compatibility of the framework on different hardware. You can see by yourself how important is for everyone to focus on its core business. When I read on the Rebol FAQ that CE compatibility needs a financer, a sponsor I realize that my nice Rebol/View Pro is far from my reference market and far from the reference market of many companies. However I admit that technologies changes really often and we could have a Windows XP powered smartphone in a couple of years or a linux computer system for our cars. Until then I remain of my opinion that .NET is one of the solutions that guarantees the wider hardware base at the least cost. Giuseppe PS: A last note: slowdown is not an issue for a lot of Rebol applications which idle waiting for an input for the most of time... -----Messaggio originale----- Da: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] Per conto di Karim El Founas Inviato: mercoledì 12 maggio 2004 18.27 A: [rebol-list--rebol--com] Oggetto: [REBOL] RE : Rebol for .NET The only hardware that run .NET is a PCx86 with Windows and, soon in the future, a Linux via Mono. A .Net interpreter/compiler of Rebol language will be less platform independent than the current one. It will also slow down the execution speed. I do not understand why it could be usefull as it. But maybe, a new set of instruction for interoperability could be interesting if it give more things than the usual dll access of view/pro and view/command. We will also lose the fast deployment of the actual less-than-1Meg rebol/view executable. -----Message d'origine----- De : [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]] De la part de Giuseppe Chillemi Envoyé : mercredi 12 mai 2004 12:47 À : [rebol-list--rebol--com] Objet : [REBOL] Rebol for .NET Do you think that a REBOL for .NET would be possible ? It will surely open the door to any hardware which has a .NET framework available ! Giuseppe -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [rebol-request--rebol--com] with unsubscribe as the subject. -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [rebol-request--rebol--com] with unsubscribe as the subject. -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [rebol-request--rebol--com] with unsubscribe as the subject.

 [8/8] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 14-May-2004 10:29


Karim et al KEF> ...even with the two new PalmOS releases wich are very powerfull. I think RT has said in the past that the limitation on Palm OS was the memory space an app could use. If the newer versions remove that limitation, then we need to get RT the info they need to reevaluate the platform. Do you have any links or info handy that we could send them? -- Gregg