This may well be the politically incorrect place to ask this question, but I'm trying to figure out if there's any reason for me to keep Regina·REXX installed on my WinXP system. To explain...
I installed Regina·Rexx some time ago to support my installation of The Hessling Editor (THE).
More recently, I've been investigating using REXX macros for a graphics utility called PMGlobe¹ (PMG). However, these macros won't work with Regina·REXX. So, I've downloaded the latest version of ooRexx, installed and tested it... and it handles the PMG macros just fine.
I've gone back to THE's homepage where I was reminded that THE will work fine with ooRexx (instead of Regina·REXX).
So the question is this: Now that I've installed ooRexx, is there any good reason for me to keep Regina·REXX installed on my PC? Perhaps the only good reason to remove it would be to get back a little filespace, as a matter of good housekeeping (and not necessity).
I guess another way to approach the question is this: Since I have room for both flavors of REXX, and since they seem to co-exist without any problems, are there some things that Regina·REXX might handle better than ooRexx (or visa versa), such that it would make sense to have both installed on my computer?
Thanks for whatever guidance you might provide.
—Thri
__________________
1. BTW, PMG is the creation of Mike Cowlishaw, the creator of the original REXX programming language for IBM. You can learn more about it here: http://www.cary.demon.co.uk/pmglobe/index.html
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The main reason we cannot move from Regina Rexx to oorexx is lack of 64-bit support. We support a lot of external Rexx function libraries that need to be built for both 32-bit and 64-bit environments. In order to load the external 64-bit function libraries requires a 64-bit Regina Rexx, which we've built for all of our Solaris and Linux platforms. At least the last time I asked the oorexx developers, 64-bit support is not "in plan" for the foreseeable future. That's too bad because there's a lot of data/control block structures that translate well to oorexx class objects that are difficult, or impossible, to represent in Regina Rexx.
If enough other developers have this same problem perhaos they'll change their mind.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
First, I can't see any harm in having multiple REXX interpreters on the same PC (I do). It lets you experiment when things seem peculiar. NONE of the current REXX interpreters is perfect, so you can get a handle on a bug by trying another interpreter. More commonly (at least for me), you can confirm that the error is in your own code.
In the area of performance, Regina can be significantly faster than ooRexx, especially if large stems are involved (recent fixes to ooRexx may have fixed this, I haven't checked).
Its easier to build a stand-alone routine with Regina, but ooRexx will give you access to all the Windows objects. Why not have the best of both worlds?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
This may well be the politically incorrect place to ask this question, but I'm trying to figure out if there's any reason for me to keep Regina·REXX installed on my WinXP system. To explain...
I installed Regina·Rexx some time ago to support my installation of The Hessling Editor (THE).
More recently, I've been investigating using REXX macros for a graphics utility called PMGlobe¹ (PMG). However, these macros won't work with Regina·REXX. So, I've downloaded the latest version of ooRexx, installed and tested it... and it handles the PMG macros just fine.
I've gone back to THE's homepage where I was reminded that THE will work fine with ooRexx (instead of Regina·REXX).
So the question is this: Now that I've installed ooRexx, is there any good reason for me to keep Regina·REXX installed on my PC? Perhaps the only good reason to remove it would be to get back a little filespace, as a matter of good housekeeping (and not necessity).
I guess another way to approach the question is this: Since I have room for both flavors of REXX, and since they seem to co-exist without any problems, are there some things that Regina·REXX might handle better than ooRexx (or visa versa), such that it would make sense to have both installed on my computer?
Thanks for whatever guidance you might provide.
—Thri
__________________
1. BTW, PMG is the creation of Mike Cowlishaw, the creator of the original REXX programming language for IBM. You can learn more about it here:
http://www.cary.demon.co.uk/pmglobe/index.html
The main reason we cannot move from Regina Rexx to oorexx is lack of 64-bit support. We support a lot of external Rexx function libraries that need to be built for both 32-bit and 64-bit environments. In order to load the external 64-bit function libraries requires a 64-bit Regina Rexx, which we've built for all of our Solaris and Linux platforms. At least the last time I asked the oorexx developers, 64-bit support is not "in plan" for the foreseeable future. That's too bad because there's a lot of data/control block structures that translate well to oorexx class objects that are difficult, or impossible, to represent in Regina Rexx.
If enough other developers have this same problem perhaos they'll change their mind.
First, I can't see any harm in having multiple REXX interpreters on the same PC (I do). It lets you experiment when things seem peculiar. NONE of the current REXX interpreters is perfect, so you can get a handle on a bug by trying another interpreter. More commonly (at least for me), you can confirm that the error is in your own code.
In the area of performance, Regina can be significantly faster than ooRexx, especially if large stems are involved (recent fixes to ooRexx may have fixed this, I haven't checked).
Its easier to build a stand-alone routine with Regina, but ooRexx will give you access to all the Windows objects. Why not have the best of both worlds?
Thanks, Kenneth for the backstory on this. Fascinating.
And Bob... you've sold me! I'm gonna keep'em both.
Again... many thanks to one and all.
—Thri