Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!csg.uwaterloo.ca!giguere
From: giguere@csg.uwaterloo.ca (Eric Giguere)
Subject: Re: dBMan 5 (Was Re: Still no Ami businessware.)
Message-ID: <1991Mar16.214651.22724@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@maytag.waterloo.edu (Admin)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1991 21:46:51 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <1991Mar15.014621.6680@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> l-rittle@uiuc.edu (Loren J. Rittle) writes:
>Why is SimpleRexx better than MinRexx?  Also what are the restrictions
>on SimpleRexx?  MinRexx is nice because you get full PD source.
>Some people may not want to put someone else's copywritten code
>in their application...  If SimpleRexx comes with source and is
>truly better than MinRexx, I'm converted :-).

As far as I know, there are no restrictions on SimpleRexx.  The original
version by Mike Sinz was published in Amiga Mail, Commodore's developer's
newsletter, and the modified version is part of (and documented) in the
upcoming "ARexx Programmer's Guide to the Amiga".  I will be releasing
the source for distribution as soon as the book is done, which it almost
is....  I wouldn't call it "better" than MinRexx, but I think it's more
flexible.

Actually if someone already has MinRexx and is familiar with it, they
might as well stay with it.  The important point to emphasize is that
as many apps as possible should be built with an ARexx port.... to whit,
you should have a look at the style guide Commodore's releasing next
month... it has a chapter devoted to ARexx interfaces.

>BTW, great Rexx article in the March issue of `Computer Language',
>Eric.
>
>`Rexx: Not Just a Wonder Dog', great name too.

Thanks!  Haven't seen the issue yet... hope the listings came out OK.

--
Eric Giguere                                       giguere@csg.UWaterloo.CA
           Unlike the cleaning lady, I have to do Windows.