[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A question

Michael,

Don't get me wrong - I'm looking for an excuse to use Dylan again.  I don't
think its unreasonable to ask questions to validate the decision.  For now I
am only out $695.00 and a little time.  My time is more valuable than my
money;-).

Most of all the stuff you mentioned that is available to Dylan is also
available to Java, Smalltalk, Eiffel, etc . .  So, rather than beating me
over the head with negatives about other languages, why not answer my
question about the use(s) of Dylan, particualarly what you are up to in the
language.

As to Dylan-centric worlds, please illuminate me as to where Dylan does
exist and how it is used.

Thanks,

Steve

Michael T. Richter <mtr@ottawa.com> wrote in message
news:orMe4.418$yO2.447@198.235.216.4...
> Stephen J. Guthrie <steve.guthrie@mantissa.com> wrote in message
> IIJe4.12685$Ce.290611@monger.newsread.com">news:IIJe4.12685$Ce.290611@monger.newsread.com...
> > OK, I'll give you the closed, Smalltalk-centric  world.  What makes
> > this less of a choice than the closed, Dylan-centric world.
>
> The fact that there is no such closed, Dylan-centric world, perhaps?  (The
> answer to this question was in the text you responded to.)
>
> I'm currently writing most of my personal software in Dylan.  Dylan lacks
> certain features I need, so I enhance it by embedding a Lua interpreter in
> my software.  This is made possible because of the C-FFI (C language
foreign
> function interface) that my Harlequin (now Functional Objects) Dylan
> environment provides.
>
> Over and above this embedding of other languages (through external C
> libraries), I also have the capacity to use COM and CORBA interfaces
> provided by third-party vendors, a capacity which I routinely use.  This
> means I can use my Dylan software to drive word processors, spreadsheets,
> databases, etc.  Indeed I can, using either ODBC or the COM database API,
> back-end any of my applications with any database which provides an ODBC
or
> COM-DB service provider -- most DBMS systems, in other words.
>
> I've never seen a Smalltalk environment which didn't basically assume that
> the outside world doesn't exist.  Most have some kind of mechanism for
> specifying interaction with the outside world, but ultimately they're so
> painful to use and so difficult to hammer into shape that it isn't worth
> even starting.  This means that, ultimately, whatever services your
> Smalltalk environment provides are the *only* services you can reasonably
> use.  You need to interface with a particular database vendor's product?
> Tough.  They only provide an ODBC/OLEDB interface.  You want to embed a
> powerful textual pattern matching library in your application?  Oh well,
> you'll have to hack one up yourself.  You want to use a huge, extremely
fast
> graphics library?  You know the drill already.  You might as well just
give
> up.
>
> --
> Michael T. Richter    <mtr@ottawa.com>    http://www.igs.net/~mtr/
> "get a life. its a plastic box with wires in it."
> -- Nadia Mizner <nadiam@onthenet.com.au> (in private correspondence)
>
>
Follow-Ups: References: