r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

Pekr
19-Aug-2008
[6846]
Dunno what channel it was, but we were discussing possible native 
REBOL DB default inclusion. I could not remember one Java DB system, 
and now I found it, in case someone would be interested:

http://www.prevayler.org/wiki/


It is Java persistent values storage. Few years ago I looked at it, 
they claimed it can be implemented in some hundreds of lines of code. 
It reminds me in-memory RebDB, I wonder if they solve concurency 
somehow ...
Gabriele
19-Aug-2008
[6847]
BT: BDB is incompatible across versions, so that whenever you install 
something that uses it it needs to install its own version; it is 
bigger than things like sqlite which are much more powerful; and 
if you need a real thing just use postgres or mysql. BDB is just 
infinite bloat...
Henrik
19-Aug-2008
[6848]
Pavel, I'm not sure that RIF determines the format for your data 
records, only for lowlevel storage on disk. Maybe I'm wrong.
BrianH
19-Aug-2008
[6849x2]
If we combine RIF, R/S and REBOL itself, we can get CouchDB in half 
a meg.
Including REBOL, I mean.
btiffin
19-Aug-2008
[6851x2]
Gabriele; True and a good point.   (I miss RMS on the Vax).  I have 
faith that RIF will come, and RIF will rock.
Re BDB;  Found this on the cuil.com main page of a rebol search, 
by fluke of timing more than anything.

http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ewhip/   Jeff Kreis' libdb interface.  Works 
great with 2.7.6 and the freed load/library.  I just had to tweak 
Jeff's libdb.c to use my setup and to get around that pesky incompatibilty 
that I blame on Gabriele now  :)
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6853]
the discution on the R3 blog about text-options allowed me to enhance 
my RTE line so with a dedicace to graham here is the new version. 
http://shadwolf.free.fr/RTE-line-Shad-06.r^^
Graham
29-Aug-2008
[6854]
:)
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6855]
so do you notice the change in performance graham  ?
Graham
29-Aug-2008
[6856x2]
not tried yet ... busy busy busy!
Much faster!
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6858x2]
thank you ^^
well  with 10 times less datas that's obvious
Graham
29-Aug-2008
[6860x2]
data = plural.
datum = singular :)
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6862]
so for the text-option i like the idea but  I agree that's not applyable 
to dynamic drawblock generation
Graham
29-Aug-2008
[6863]
( it's Latin ... not English )
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6864x2]
ok so datas ;P
cause i'm me and hum I do what please me that's what the concept 
of freedom is all about  :P
Graham
29-Aug-2008
[6866]
the concept of freedom is another channel !
shadwolf
29-Aug-2008
[6867]
graham i'm kiding thank you for the explanation ^^...
Graham
4-Sep-2008
[6868]
Has anyone given any thought to what printing model R3 is going to 
use?
Henrik
4-Sep-2008
[6869]
as in printing to physical printers?
PeterWood
4-Sep-2008
[6870]
On behalf of Graham: Yes as in printing to real printers.
Henrik
4-Sep-2008
[6871x2]
That's going to be very difficult unless we simply employ some form 
of postscript output, similar to VID.
I've worked extensively for many months with a printing system for 
R2 and it works, but only in conjunction with Ghostscript. It's not 
possible to print directly to a postscript printer unless you want 
to adapt your output to each single printer to work around hardware 
bugs.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6873]
I've just built a direct printing library for R2, Windows only. It's 
a wrapper on Win32 Print API, so it supports all printers. It support 
a subset of Draw dialect as input. I was needing it to print reports 
for the project I'm currently working on. It still needs some additionnal 
work to be released publicly (like adding a port scheme layer for 
more intuitive usage).
Henrik
4-Sep-2008
[6874]
dockimbel, that sounds very interesting
Graham
4-Sep-2008
[6875x3]
Yep, very interesting.  So, I presume that you have screen preview 
as well?
Currently I use the postscript dialect and do a preview with draw, 
but because of the difficulties of rotations, and translations, anything 
that involves those screws up the screen preview.
And scaling.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6878x5]
Well, as my lib use Draw dialect, you can have preview support almost 
for free ;-). Scaling is supported by my lib, it even has a auto-scaling 
default mode to workaround different printer's hardware margins.
I was thinking about adding also a few other import filters for makedoc, 
pdf-maker dialect and View layouts, so something like this should 
be possible : write printer:// layout [...]
But as my free time is very reduced, I'll just release my lib with 
the scheme wrapper and let the community add layers upon that.
I don't plan to support Draw rotation, translation or matrix operations 
in the first release, but someone can add it quite easily.
(sorry for being off topic)
BrianH
4-Sep-2008
[6883]
Once we have some sane documentation of the Windows printing model 
(read: the code you've written so far) it shouldn't be too hard. 
Not off-topis, btw: We can adapt your code to R3 and it might serve 
as the germination of a REBOL printing model.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6884x2]
(moving to Printing group)
Does R3 already have support for loading DLL ?
BrianH
4-Sep-2008
[6886x2]
I don't think so, as the library API is considered to be a good candidate 
for a complete redo as the Plugin API.
That doesn't mean we can't get started on designing a good printing 
dialect.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6888]
Having the plugin API is good for static linking, but dynamic linking 
will still be needed (unless I missed something about R3 plugins?).
BrianH
4-Sep-2008
[6889]
You did. R3 plugins are to be a cross between a REBOL module and 
a library wrapper, and can be dynamically loaded like modules.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6890]
So, do you mean that with R3 to access a DLL I have to build (in 
REBOL and/or C) a plugin, then dynamically load the plugin and then 
the plugin will load the DLL ?
BrianH
4-Sep-2008
[6891]
It's not that different from writing a script wrapper for a DLL now, 
just easier and more powerful (in theory).
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6892]
Does the DLL wrapper need to be written in C or REBOL ?
BrianH
4-Sep-2008
[6893x2]
I gather that it depends on how awful the DLL's API is. Again, in 
theory because we haven't done plugins yet.
I expect that most useful wrappers will be a mix of both.
Dockimbel
4-Sep-2008
[6895]
Well, in R2, you always have the option of writting a small wrapper 
DLL in C to interface with a complex API, if it's not possible to 
make a direct wrapper with only REBOL code.