World: r3wp

Terry, I am not going to learn REBOL to generate JavaScript code. 
I already know REBOL. I already have to generate JavaScript code, 
for my job at the very least. As for a REBOL-hosted JavaScript runtime, 
that is likely to be just a useful side effect.

Petr "JavaScript, despite the name, is essentially unrelated to the 
Java programming language, although both have the common C syntax, 
and JavaScript copies many Java names and naming conventions. "

And what I learn can be adapted to other targets, including C, in 
theory. Though C is a poor choice for generating iPhone apps - it 
would be better to generate LLVM code directly, as it has a better 
semantic model than C.

Or even Objective C.

http://phonegap.com/

Interesting. Your point?

While the Rebol community chats, the world solves.

You are talking to the wrong part of the community. I have a full-time 
job solving problems with REBOL.

Here's my problem.. A simple way to create apps for the iPhone.. 
Rebol seems like the perfect candidate. Any ETAs?

Not happening as long as Apple won't allow 3rd party language runtimes 
on the phone.

I don't know anyone in the REBOL community with the porting skills 
who actually owns an iPhone.

I have the skills, but not the phone, and I like the phone I have. 
Do you want to buy me an iPod Touch? And some time?

And a Mac?

Henrik is right... their license forbids other languages and programs 
with a plugin architecture, like say,  other browsers.....

You would have to make a subset of REBOL a library that is statically 
linked to other applications, and that subset could not include any 
of the DO dialect functions. You could generate those applications 
using Mac-hosted standard REBOL code though.

I think that's my point.

How exactly is that RT's fault?

These legal restrictions are why there is no Java or Flash for the 
iPhone.

A rebol -> obj C would work.. like the ECMA -> obj C example link... 
I just doubt i will ever happen with RT

it :)

It's not RT's job to build that. _You_ build it.

I could say that I need a development environment for a robotic vacuum 
cleaner. Do I complain that someone hasn't built it for me, or do 
I make one myself? I choose the latter. The only reason that there 
is no REBOL development environment for the iPhone is that I don't 
need one, and noone who does has made one. This is a community - 
RT is a company. If you want RT to make that, you pay them. Otherwise 
make it yourself.

I don't expect anyone to make it. That's the problem with Rebol.. 
if you want something, you need to make it.

as with any other language?

There will always be people who chat instead of do, in any community. 
You can't use the work of people who do in another context to berate 
people who chat in this one. We have people who do as well, and the 
people who chat won't start magically becoming people who do when 
transported into another community.


Personally, I like the people who chat. They provide ideas for the 
people who do.

If you want something, you need to make it. Or pay for it to be made. 
Or look to see if someone else has made it and get it from them. 
On any platform, even this one. Such is life.

I have to retract one of my statements: There is at least one person 
with the porting skills to make a development environment for the 
iPhone who actually has an iPhone. But he's busy working on more 
important (to him) stuff.

I think that Terry just tries to state the fact - that our community, 
even if honestly trying to do the best, is so small, that we will 
not be successfull in spreading REBOL as much as other projects span 
.NET, iPhone, etc.

I have an iTouch :-)

Those other products have large corporations behind them, and depend 
on wide adoption. I'm not sure that either is the case here.

Maarten, do you have the need to write applications for your iTouch?

Yes. But as is stands, it is faster to not do that in Rebol... for 
now.

 if you want something, you need to make it.

 - yes, and what? If I would not using my dialect to make SWF files, 
 I would have to use for example mtasc, but If I would need to for 
 example scale all the graphics in the file as I needed now, I would 
 have to code in Ocaml which I would not be able. With Rebol it took 
 me 2 evenings.

(I don't mind Objective C)

I really don't think that there would be somehow in Ocaml comunity 
to do it for me.

And I bought the iTouch as MP3-player while running...  figured might 
as well get some extra goodies. Now that I have it: it turns the 
world upside-down. Buying a little app for e2 over your wlan with 
to taps, it's tasteful.

See i like rebolbecause I allows OLdes to express is dreams and that's 
a hudge thing  ^^

See i like rebol because  it allows OLdes to express is dreams and 
that's a hudge thing  ^^ ( sorry it's really late and i'm prettry 
tired... = )  )

well i sued most of the programing langugages in the world  and rebol 
is from far the most interresting.  It needs to be enhanced  but 
as a matter of fact the numbres of main releases were not alot so 
we can say that rebolis still a very young language. A cross the 
years a lot of experience have been collected and i'm sure Carl took 
a good note of all this and that he will show is that R3

will be a major step  stone in Rebol history

About naming VID3.4, here's a pretty bad name for a UI: http://www.guidebookgallery.org/guis/newwave

Henrik - I responded to your blog post :-)

There are finally a couple of signs of life with R3 GUI; 2 new pages 
in DocBase.

http://www.rebol.net/wiki/R3_GUI

No objection so far. I like the very minimal syntax, like in

panel 2 [
	label "Name:"
	field "your name"
	label "Comment:"
	area
]

This is the new stuff from carl?

Yes.  The new god :)

Let's hope the behaviour of the GUI is as good as the syntax.

Looks good. Not much different from 3.0 but I guess we only see hints 
of that underlying stuff that Carl spoke about...for example submit 
buttons to urls and services...the 'send' action.etc.

it looks significantly easier to build styles for, but I have yet 
to see what the costs are, if any.