Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!cbmvax!ulowell!miner From: miner@dino.ulowell.edu (Rich Miner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: AREXX, a plea, and an egoboo. Message-ID: <1961@dino.ulowell.edu> Date: 8 Apr 88 06:19:46 GMT References: <900@nuchat.UUCP> Reply-To: miner@dino.ulowell.edu (Rich Miner) Organization: University of Lowell Productivity Center, Lowell MA. Lines: 58 In article <900@nuchat.UUCP> peter@nuchat.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: >I'm sorry, but REXX just doesn't feel right. It's too big (conceptually)... >I have the same feelings about Conman and a host of other programs ... Next thing you know he'll stomp on Bill's gold fish! :-) >I'm sure they're great programs, but I just don't like the way they taste. >I have been given to understand, for example, that Conman includes a pipe >device. What's a pipe doing there? It doesn't make sense to me. There is no pipe in Conman, get your facts straight! Conman is a replacement console device that adds functionality like command line editing. If you don't like the "taste", use workbench, because Conman "tastes" like standard console device, with a little gravy. Bill H. has also implemented a true pipe handler that can be accessed via shells, with or without running conman. >Similarly, REXX combines two dissimilar functions (at least they seem >dissimilar to me): a message system and a programming language. The concept of a procedural language accessible via message ports provides a powerful, flexible, and consistent environment. As an example: From within an editor (such as versions of DME, EMACS, and TxEd) you can interactively compile and locate errors in C code; startup Amiga-TeX to process a buffer; communicate with the MicroFiche Filer II running in server mode; interactively spell check an edit buffer... >Use REXX if you prefer. Just don't force me to... which is what will end >up happening if it becomes a standard. It is becoming a defacto standard. Over eight products I know of have ARexx interfaces, and ARexx is new. There are shells, editors, data bases, text processing systems, spell checkers, and other applications integrating ARexx interfaces. It helps the end user, and the developer. Just as intuition provides a common mouse/menu interface, ARexx provides a common procedural interface, and a method of application integration via message based IPC. >I suppose I'll have to buy REXX just to see if I should provide a REXX port >in Browser. Grumble. You haven't even worked with the system! How do you expect anyone to respect your opinions? Don't critique what you have not tried! >To quote from the Intuition manual (page whatever, under OpenWindow): >"Meanwhile, I still opt (and argue) for simplicity and elegance." If you looked at Bill Hawes programs you would see that he preaches and follows this same philosophy. I have used ARexx for several months, written a number of ARexx macros and an ARexx interface to an imaging library. It is a powerful tool that has been both easy to learn and work with. It saved me the effort of producing my own, non consistent, procedural interface and provides much more. Disclaimer: I know Bill Hawes personally and have worked with him on some of my ARexx adventures. -- Rich miner@dino.ulowell.edu 617/452-5000x2693 UL-CPE Imaging Research Lab