Re: Development

[Dorothy Day DAY@xxxxxxxx]

>  Well, since many of us probably won't be using that windoz product, it
>matters little whether you use VBA or XPL, I guess. REXX would sure be nice.

Not matter?? It seems there has been a *lot* of discussion lately
 about an immense investment made by Xy users over the years in
XPL routines they've devised to meet individual needs. Surely
there is no desire on *anyone's* part to make XPL *less*
available or userful? Many of us have found the fully integrated
XPL nearly as essential as the EDITOR it enhances to get chores
done. (Just how difficult *would* it be to add a WHILE provision
to XPL, btw?)

As for REXX vs VBL and its cousins, I agree that if "an embedded
basis language for Windows" could be made available, it should
be "something that can be easily integrated." Pascal/Delphi is
more the direction I'd like to see, but all the OOP group are
close enough to each other these days to be pretty readily
convertible. If TTG programmers are already using VLB, that
seems a reasonable option.


>BTW, Ken, have you noticed that IBM is going to be marketing Starwriter as
>its OS/2 wp? I think it's truly a loss to all of us that the IBM/XyQuest
>consortium fell apart. Not to knock TTG, but having XY in the IBM camp
>looked liked a winning combination. Sigh!

 Considering IBM's abrupt decision to close down its entire
division handling Signature and other products, I shudder to
think what might be the fate of Lotus products if that buyout
occurs. Large corporations make sweeping decisions on the basis
of considerations way outside the interests of small groups of
users (like the buyers of PC software...) Winning combinations
are judged from an entirely different bottom-line perspective,
and software users get whatever crumbs (or cuts) that may fall
their way. To paraphase a much-repeated statement, "IBM is not
the answer. IBM is the question, and the answer is no."
   Dorothy Day


Dorothy Day, Indiana University SLIS day@xxxxxxxx