On 21 Nov 2002 at 0:50, adem wrote:

>Is it not a good idea to embed a proper compiler (no offence, BTW)
>such as Free Pascal (aka, FPK) into FB. AFAIK, FPK exists in almost
>all FB does and FPK is a very good Delphi-like compiler.

At first, FPC isn't so very good compiler yet. Second, it is
written in Pascal while FB is written in C (С++ here and there).
I guess you are a programmer. Are you ready to do it (to embed FPC
into FB)?

>-- We would not have to do mental switch everytime we need to write a
>stored procedure or a trigger in FB. And, for those who are familiar
>with Delphi/Kylix, learning curve would be a breeze too.

If one's mental is so hard to switch, hire another person specially
for writing SP/Triggers.

>-- We would not need UDFs that need to be compiled for every new
>platform, FB could compile them by itsef.

Another step: let FB writes UDFs itself! :)

>Was the reason not to do so something like this a historic one
>(i.e. nothing suitable vailable at the time) or something deeper than
>that?

Ordinary programming languages don't have operators to manage DB
objects. So every language must be "adapted" to work as SP language.
Usually DBMS developers don't want to spend time to implement
compiler of "complex" language instead of concentrating on improving
DBMS engine. And even if they do (in case of IBM and Oracle) results
aren't impressive.

Once more time: if you are ready to do this - try it. Get sources
of FB and FPC from appropriate CVS's and try to cross them. Having
succeeded - become FB team member and fork your branch in FB tree. Or
just publish results and wait for rapturous responses.

>Would the much more experienced comment whether this has the
>benefits I mentioned, or it has possible drawbacks that would
>make the idea pathatic.

By my experience, dedicated language compilers make less problems,
more stable and more easy to implement.

SY, Dimitry Sibiryakov.