Re: New RDBMS implementation

Em Thu, 06 May 2004 11:16:47 +0000, Alfredo Novoa escreveu:

>>	Not specifically, but I remember checking some existing ones
>>quite some time ago and it didn't seem specially difficult.

        I haven't Dataphor installed right now, but the version I got had. Nathan mentioned it, but when he did I had already found it. Not sure if he maintained the source code in recent releases.

>>	Do you mean sending COBOL or C to the DBMS?  You lost me
>>here...

        OK.

        Now what I mean is that if you do any D embedded from a host language, how do you control transactions if your D has only single-statement (actually grouped statement) transactions?

> For typical business systems probably not. All we really need are chars
> numbers and booleans. But for a general purpose DBMS it would be very
> recomendable IMO.

        I toyed around a little with Dataphor D4 v1 hierarchies, and the problem was that deciding on a hierarchy for even moderately complex types was not worth the trouble.

>>	That'd be nice.  I wasn't so much thinking about Tutorial D
>>and D4 interoperability, since Pascal isn't so much more respectable

        No, these are only good Pascal programmers. Hackers despise Pascal.

>>than IBMese in hackerdom, but about something C-like and something
>>functional perhaps.

        I was only reporting... I'm no programmer, much less language designer.

>>	It's all Lisp.  Also Sabre seems to be 100% Lisp.

        But it can talk to one, and one can use Lisp to build one.

        There was someone who did a Scheme flavor of SQL, I seem to remember...

> They can do that anyway.

        So why run the risk? Just for some marginal technical improvements and to go along the herd?

> I don't see anything wrong in VS integration

        I see. I can't legally use it, it is too expensive hereabouts.

> It would be a suicide to compete with MS with a word processor, but they
> are nobody in business systems. Navision is very mediocre and has a
> primitive navigational technology.

        Navision is their entry-level offering. They have other, not so bad offers: Great Plains, for example.

        But the thing is, had they nothing, they'll come after you if you get in their radar. If you are cross-platform, you have a way out. Moreover, if you are not cross-platform, you are really feeding your own executioner...

>>  Or that at a
>>MS-WCE conference there was a line to the questions microphone where
>>people wanted to describe their projects and ask MS representatives if
>>they didn't intend to enter that particular niche?

        This is about MS WinCE, not Navision.

>>	I had forgotten about #Develope, but Eclipse is Java which you
>>dislike.

        No, not about MS Windows or not, but about C# or Java.

>>	Not ignoring, but ensuring you get portability and less
>>competition.  And freedom from patents, have you seen /. today?

        That's why Java and other portable languages exist.

> If Mono or dotGNU were able to run MS Office things could change.

        MS will make sure they don't, but then we have Wine. Wine already does, and VMWare even better.

        You are in the rich parts of the world. Hereabouts we're using OpenOffice.org which we can afford, and gives us freedom.

> You can count with your fingers the people that touch the Linux kernel.

        Yet I know scores of people who can use old hardware because of GNU/Linux, and lots of others who use it for freedom.

> To learn and to do the things a lot better. Many people describe the Net
> as a better Java.

        Please don't help MS Novilingua. Net is a nickname for the Internet. The product is called MS.Net.

>>	Java developers seem to disagree quite a lot from you.

        Perhaps some time ago?

>>Specifically integration with MS products can be counterproductive as it
>>may mean strengthening proprietariness and a competitor.

        Yes. Just don't make yourself dependent on it.

>>	Hardware platforms are not significant, they exist only in the
>>MS WCE space, and that's for PDAs, WinTerms and the like.

        You've been reading too much press releases. 64 bits have been around for a decade. MS had MS WNT for the Alpha and killed it before enabling 64 bits in it. MS waited until now to have 64 bits products again so they could do it with no porting at all. That is the real reason why Opteron is going to kill Itanium, and why inferior Itanium is being hyped over UltraSPARC or PowerPC.

>> Hm, you can start with some articles about Zope or MySQL that >>recently made the rounds at /. and LWN, respectively [...]
> Thanks, I will look this.

        Be welcome! There is also a free software business mailing list being carried by Gmane.org, and I seem to remember that FSF had a program to help people wanting to do free software business.

-- 
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra           +55 (11) 5685 2219
Av Sgto Geraldo Santana, 1100 6/71               +55 (11) 5686 9607
04.674-000  São Paulo, SP                                    BRASIL
http://br.geocities.com./lgcdutra/