Subject Re: [IB-Architect] Extending SP lang. to ISQL
Author Dalton Calford
Hi Nando,

From what I have understood from the discussions is replacing the
current SP/Trigger language with another system instead of extending
what is currently there.

So far, Java seems to be the favorite, I personally do not care what the
underlying language is as long as it is stable. Everything so far has
been talking about some form of interpreted language (Java, Perl,
BLR...) that would have a interpreter or JVM to implement. The only
problem I have with interpreted languages is they have a tendancy to me
memory hogs. Perl throws memory at every problem it may have while
JVM's are bloatware depending on the version. It would be interesting
(as a academic discussion) to consider non-portable compiled code kept
within the database inside of blobs. When a SP is compiled, the server
could send the code to an external compiler that pre-processes the code
and returns the platform specific binary.
Many opensource compilers exist, as well as preprocessors and
templates. It would take a bit of work but it could be set up so that
SP code could be written in any language (or subset thereof) and the
server does not care because it is only calling a shared library.
This would keep the server small, but could lead to all sorts of
debuging issues.
Somthing to think about, write down in triplicate, file one copy, shread
another while burying the third in the local field......

best regards


Nando Dessena wrote:
> I believe that's not quite the point. From what I have understood, the
> general idea is to allow UDFs (and, possibly, stored procedures) to be
> written in (insert language of choice); procedure language as it is
> should not be touched by this feature, although I can see that some work
> would have to be done to make the two approaches compatible and
> transparent to the developer; I also believe that the current procedure
> language needs some of the improvements of which we are speaking, _in
> addition_ to the (java?) UDFs & SPs.
> Please, list, let me know if I have not understood properly.
> Regards