EDI in linux (everone PLEASE read)

[Ben Duncan]

No flame seen here Roger. I can do C, no can do C++ -- still a strange 
beast to me.
I also find that some commercial C++ products do things a little 
differently than others.
Also was unaware of Tcl/Tk's progression.
  REBOL is still a proprietary item, and I could not tell if anyone 
who used it was going to have buy some sort of runtime.

Python and PERL are still an interpreative language, as someone 
pointed out, the
translation part may be better left to a compile language.

Still, the design structure would be the same:

A:   A database file to describe the structure and elements of a 
transaction set.
B:   A database file to describe the transaction set(s) for a trading 
partner, generated from A:
C:   A Database file of the actual transactions - both incoming and 
outgoing.

Now that is it in it's MOST simplistic form. Then you have to deal 
with VAN's, account information,
delivery method (Most of the Automotive industry still uses the 
"email" style).

Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:58:12 -0500
> "Richard R. Sivernell" <res005ru at gte.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>I would suggest that you not use C, but C++ as this is much better for the
>>reusability
>>of source code. C is old coding. C++ is going to give you the greatest
>>speed after ass
>>lang. 
> 
> 
> Ummm...
> 
> No flame war here (please!), but this is all (I think) a matter of coding
> style. I have seen lots of C++ code that was so bad I would hate to suggest
> it be reused. And some C code that has a decent API so that it can easily be
> reused. Not in the C++ sense, but in a pratical sense.
> 
> I just had to comment. I will say no more. 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Ben Duncan   Phone (601)-355-2574     Fax (601)-355-2573   Cell 
(601)-946-1220
                         Business Network Solutions
                      336 Elton Road  Jackson MS, 39212
    "Software is like Sex, it is better when it's free" - Linus Torvalds