|Re: Interpreters (and now, byte code standards) firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-11-15)|
|Interpreters: Summary email@example.com (1991-11-21)|
|Re: Interpreters: Summary firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-11-23)|
|From:||email@example.com (Randell Jesup)|
|Organization:||Commodore, West Chester, PA|
|Date:||Sat, 23 Nov 91 15:14:22 GMT|
firstname.lastname@example.org (Gavin Thomas Nicol) writes:
> The following is a summary of email responses to the recent question
>about the best way to implement an Application Extension Language Interpreter.
5) YOU SHOULD USE REXX
Rexx is part of IBM's SAA, and is also a standard part of the Amiga OS
version 2.0x. It was designed to be very usable by non-programmers (including
secretaries, such as at the Stanford Linear Accelerator (SLAC)). Many of the
staff and secretaries use it there. It's designed to talk to multiple
applications - for example, at SLAC, it's often acting as an intermediary
between an text editor (such as microemacs), a TeX previewer, and a Tek
Rexx is also available for PC's running msdos, though you don't get
the multitasking features of ARexx.
Calishaw's book on Rexx is available in bookstores. Ask in
comp.lang.rexx for ISBN if you need it or want more info.
[Are there inexpensive versions available that one could build into an
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.