Re: Using a Database within Windows + Dyalog APL

"Gosi" <gosinn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:bc4bb763-3121-4c64-98bf-55e230430326@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 22, 7:00 am, Dick Bowman <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "jk" <*a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (remove the asterisks)> wrote in news:480c679d$0
>> $25476$ba620...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> > "aleph0" <apl68...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>news:820de252-ea05-4843-b7fa-d3a3f0ca2256@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>> ... and take 200 times overhead for granted
>>
>> >> Is it really "that" bad ?
>> >> .. say compared to MySQL.
>>
>> > that's like comparing 20 inches of snow with 21
>>
>> Gennelmen...
>>
>> Are we having a self-destructive argument here?
>>
>> There are good reasons for choosing to use either a "general" SQL-based
>> database (MySQL, SQLite, DB2, and many others) or a roll-your-own data
>> storage scheme.  The application and the context dictates.
>>
>> I've achieved quite adequate performance interfacing from APL (and J)
to a
>> variety of "standard" relational databases.
>>
>> The point really is that it is quite easy for us to write applications
in
>> APL2, Dyalog, APLX or J (don't have any recent APL*PLUS/2000/Next
>> experience) that can share their data with applications written in
other
>> languages - all the vendors have done a great job for us and we need to
get
>> the message out that Jerry Turner put into his book title twenty years
>> ago...
>>
>> APL Is Easy!
>
> There are people who may agree that APL is Easy and I find it so.
> On the other hand there seems to be hell of a lot of others who do not
> agree for some reason.
> I for one would very much like to find out why.
> Over and over I have demonstrated to people how easy it is and they
> say wow and then nothing happens in most cases.
> I have started to think that may APL is not so easy after all.
> There is something not right.
> I think I know some of the problems and I am doing some experiments to
> correct them.
> Mind you those problems are not technical.
> As far as technique is concerned APL is superior.

Thanks Dick Bowman.
I agree with Gosi -
I never got any finger (even the little) behind MS ACCESS for instance,
which is
meant for the masses, I find that a dragon, while I've built numerous
rather 
complex APL applications.
.... must be something with a particular constellation of the brains,
fudder for 
brain-experts.
(I've met e.g. numerous musicians amongst the APL-ers).
jk