Re: [tutoriald-design] Design Goals

[<reh...@t-...>]

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Brian Olsen wrote:
> >
> > In fact I was already planning to implement a Tutorial D interpreter
> > at some later time.
>
> This is excellent. Do you have a sketch or outline of how you are going
> to approach it?
>

Only a few ideas. I want Duro to support operators written in arbitrary
languages, so my idea is to implement the interpreter in form of a
function that can be passed to Duro when defining a user-defined operator.
That interpreter function will later be called with the code as an
argument. The interpreter program would simply read (or map) the
code into memory and pass it to the interpreter function.

>
> > But these are mainly two: I/O operations and error handling.
> > It should be not very difficult to add I/O operations, and
> > for the first version(s) the error handling could just be having the
> > interpreter exit with an error message. Later some TRY ... CATCH
> > construct could be added to the language.
>
>
> Besides the two things you mention, can there be anything else that can
> make it 'industrial strength'?

IMHO nothing that couldn't be added later. The TTM mentions sessions and
connections, but that doesn't apply to a 'embedded' DB engine like Duro.

We might want to have some statement that changes the current database,
as Tutorial D doesn't provide that. But again this could be easily
added to the language. For the beginning, the current database
could be provided to the interpreter through command line arguments .

--
Rene´