Can Rev be used as server database?
Alex Rice
alrice at ARCplanning.com
Sat Jul 12 11:42:00 EDT 2003
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 06:13 AM,
revolution at knowledgeworks.plus.com wrote:
>
> (Sorry folks, this is a long and rambling post...)
Bernard, you are raising lots of interesting issues but I disagree with
you about some of technical possibilities.
- Very high performance servers can be constructed in a single thread
on the Medusa design
- Python is a scripting language with an object persistence scheme.
- Transcript is a scripting language with data stacks and custom
properties (like object persistence)
Technically, the starting points are the same. I conclude that Python
has nothing up on us, and it's totally possible to do it in Revolution.
If you are arguing on business and organizational grounds that it's not
a good idea, that we don't want to be kind of second-rate ZOPE
competitor with less programmers and less funding and less organization
then I can agree with that.
> I don't see any benefit from Rev users or Runrev re-inventing the
> wheel.
Agreed. But custom properties are *fast* and integrate completely into
revolution. So let's use them! I get tired of SQL and this is one of
the things that appealed to me about Zope.
> Now, on to Zope :-) ...
All well put.
> I agree totally with the idea of greater integration of Rev with web
> standards and technologies, but I don't think that the aim should be
> on server-side processing. I mentioned this also on the list
> recently, but was met by a fairly dead silence.
I do not think people should be prevented from using Rev on the server
side, for lack of documentation or supporting. I think already Rev is
firmly oriented on the client-side and one should not to worry it's
going to suddenly turn into a server-side only solution.
> I asked what Runrev's plans for XML were, and pointed out that it
> seemed to be a bit unclear as to the purpose of including XML
> functionality in the latest version.
Huh? Maybe I don't understand the question. Obviously the purpose was
to have an XML parser. I'm using it in my project. OK it's only 1 file
of XML I'm parsing and could have easily done it with regular
expressions instead- but since the XML parser is there I'm using it.
> Geoff Canyon responded to say he has a stack that can transform a Rev
> app to XML and can transform XML to Rev. But it doesn't work with Rev
> 2, so as far as I can see, they still don't have any clear plan for
> XML integration.
Probably lack of time.
> IIRC, the altBrowser is IE only? I would not like to rely on
> Microsoft for anything. They have a history of destroying competition
> (by fair means or foul). And it is my belief that we have seen
> nothing yet: they are going to tighten their monopoly position in ways
> that many people have not yet imagined.
Naturally... But embedding browsers into apps is something the
Microsoft has offered and Apple (will) offer. I don't think either of
them are going to stop offering an embed-able browser.
> If Runrev is going to become more closely integrated with a browser,
> then I would strongly suggest that people consider the Gecko rendering
> engine from the Mozilla project. Yes, I know that the Mozilla browser
> can be a bit of a sloth compared to IE (although I don't think they
> are that different - I've seen IE take up to 100mb of RAM on my
> laptop...yep, 100mb!) I'm unclear as to how big a task it might be to
> employ Gecko. I suspect that MS make it relatively easy to integrate
> IE (people behind the Mozilla project just didn't get it, until Apple
> snubbed them with Safari).
>
> I don't think one should get hung up on web browsers as a platform.
> They are a joke. Try developing quite simple CSS that work in IE6 on
> XP, then view them in IE on OS X and see them not work. Same applies
> to Netscape and Mozilla. Same applies to Javascript.
Yes, as a former web developer/programmer, I agree. Also look at
bugzilla. Their project goals state it will be "browser agnostic". Ha!
So far it only works with mozilla.
> Why is replacing Java applets or Flash over-optimistic?
Because they have huge installed bases I guess. I think a lot of Flash
users wouldn't touch Revolution one they saw the jaggy graphics in Rev.
They are used to antialiased graphics I'm sure. Personally I dislike
Java applets, so I wish Rev would kill them off.
> So what is required?
> a) integration with web technology (especially XML)
> b) trust (certification) and/or a local security sandbox.
>
> These are both achievable (and probably in many different ways), and I
> think the market potential is phenomenal.
Agreed!
> I want to be able to use Rev as I have described above within the next
> 6 to 12 months.
>
Well I hope it happens :-)
Alex Rice, Software Developer
Architectural Research Consultants, Inc.
http://ARCplanning.com
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list