World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Pekr 21-Nov-2009 [19787x2] | BrianH: 'call in R3 is more low level, right? I would like to do following thing - I want to have few powerpoint presentations running in a loop. In R2, I could use call/wait, and once the presentation is finished, the console returned. In R3, there are no refinemenst as /wait, /output. Is there any equivalence? Was R2 using "start" command in windows? I tried with "start", but got following error: >> call "start /WAIT powerpnt /S test.ppt" ** Access error: external process failed: "Systém nemůže nalézt uvedený soubor.^ M^/" ** Where: call ** Near: call "start /WAIT powerpnt /S test.ppt" |
hmm, even if I use: >> call "cmd /c start /WAIT powerpnt /S test.ppt" ... it behaves in an async manner. It is a bit difficult without some R2 features. I had another plan in mind - I still have some R2 wrapper for Win32API funcs like launching app, moving window, setting its position, finding window by name, etc. (it originated from Gregg's send-keys dialect). But with R3, we don't have DLL interface anymore. Now I wonder, if I should write an extension, or there is some plan to adress #1223? I can use R2 as an interim solution, just wondering which way we go in R3, in regards to 'call. If I should start to think Extension way, or wait for 'call being enhanced? | |
Maxim 21-Nov-2009 [19789] | you mean you're going to use REBOL TWO? why? I thought we should all be using R3 ;-D |
Pekr 21-Nov-2009 [19790x2] | I plan to use R3. I defined what makes R3 beta a good release, and adressing 'call is one of those points. CGI/IO was already adressed. |
Well, I need to calm down ... I am out of this place for some time .... | |
jocko 21-Nov-2009 [19792] | Pekr, I did this interface some time ago. It is based on a previous implementation from J.F. Theis, and is implemented as a TCP-IP server. I will certainely make out of it an extension for R3, but it can be already be used either with R2 or R3 as soon as you are able to send TCP-IP commands. See http://colineau.societeg.com/rebol/r2win151.html . Unfortunately, it seems that the host site is down right now. If the shutdown persists, I will put it in some other place. |
BrianH 21-Nov-2009 [19793x3] | Gabriele, every time you mention a document or code that was posted somewhere two years ago, without providing a link, or stating which AltME world the file is in (with file name/path preferably), then it comes across as useless complaining. If you want something done, say so. If you want to say that you *already did something*, prove it. Show me. Complaints about a time before the restart of the R3 project aren't relevant to the current project. Live in the now :) |
The standard TELLS you when - No it doesn't. The standard doesn't cover R3 internals, not even in a generic non-language-specific way. The "when" I was talking about has nothing to do with the encoding itself - it has to do with internal data formats. | |
As for where things go, we built places for such things (as mentioned above) and they haven't moved in a year. | |
Henrik 22-Nov-2009 [19796] | wouldn't it make sense for TRIM/WITH to be able to use a bitset? >> trim/with "abc" charset "ac" ** Script error: trim does not allow bitset! for its str argument |
GiuseppeC 22-Nov-2009 [19797x3] | Today I have seen a Wii GUI in action. It has been designed to be used with a remote controller. Also XBOX 360 and PS3 have been. Interactive Boxes like Digital TV receiver, Mediacenters are designe to be used with a remote. We are entering in an era where mouse and keyboard are no more the standard input methods. |
To the designers of REBOL3 GUI please consider the new paradigms and provide different interaction methods: - GUI to be used with REMOTE controllers and similar devices - GUI to be used with the click of the mouse an keyboards and even pedals. - GUI to be used with multi-gesture multipoint touches (either on big and small screens) | |
Animated transitions and some 3D are necessary for a modern GUI system. GUIs are the basic instruments users interact s with our applications. If we give the feeling of a modern GUI 50% of our work has been done because they will feel the program to be modern and good, even if it isn't. really so. Our customers are people: specialist and families like the one I have encountered this evening. They use Modern Touch based Cell Phones, MediaCenters, Remote Controllers and at the and Mouse and Keyboards. Hope my observations helps. | |
GiuseppeC 23-Nov-2009 [19800] | This has been a very silent month for REBOL... probably a lot of things are underway. |
Maxim 23-Nov-2009 [19801x3] | Carl is furiously at work putting time on the host. a lot of unglorified but required time. |
once that is out the bag... I expect a lot will suddenly happen at once. | |
its "the deep breath before the plunge" ;-) | |
Henrik 24-Nov-2009 [19804] | A95 released with compiler optimizations. |
Geomol 24-Nov-2009 [19805x3] | I see a performance increase. R3 is faster than R2 in a few tests, I've done so far. |
I tested this: dt [a: 1. b: 2. loop 10000000 [a + b * a / b]] and this: do http://www.fys.ku.dk/~niclasen/rebol/r3/mandelbrot.r | |
Also do http://www.rebol.com/speed.r show an increase in REBOL-Hertz. | |
sqlab 24-Nov-2009 [19808] | I get with R3 lower performance with Processor, Memory and Disk/File, just the value for Console is almost 500% increased |
Geomol 24-Nov-2009 [19809] | sqlab, did you upgrade to latest alpha 95? |
Cyphre 24-Nov-2009 [19810] | Here is slight comparison with the latest R3 release: I used this script identically for all tests: http://cyphre.mysteria.cz/tests/mandelbrot-int.r results on AMD Athlon 1.4GHz, 1GB RAM: REBOL2 partially JIT compiled version 0.471s 1.0 speed ratio REBOL2 (REBOL/View 2.7.6.3.1 14-Mar-2008) 12.15s 25.8 x slower REBOL3 (r3-a95.exe) 13.87s 29.45 x slower REBOL3 (r3-a94.exe) 17.54s 37.24 x slower |
sqlab 24-Nov-2009 [19811] | yes, Version: 2.100.95.3.1 Build: 24-Nov-2009/6:42:02 msvcrtd.dll disabled |
Geomol 24-Nov-2009 [19812x3] | Hm, I need to test some more, I guess, because I initially see a speed increase, but your results show differently. |
Same mandelbrot: REBOL 2 ver. 2.7.6.3.1 9.35s r3-a95.exe 7.521s Results is from an Intel Pentium 4 CPU 2.80GHz running WinXP. Maybe R3 is compile optimized for intel CPUs? | |
sqlab, how do I check, if msvcrtd.dll is enabled/disabled? | |
sqlab 24-Nov-2009 [19815] | just rename it or put it somewhere out of the search paths. It was needed for the first a95 release with debug information. |
Geomol 24-Nov-2009 [19816] | Ok, got it. More info here: http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/r3blog.r?view=0297#comments |
Pavel 27-Nov-2009 [19817] | Gabriele, is it possible to dispatch multiple request to wiki TCP examples "pong" server listening on single port? It should be possible but for me second request is without response until the first still open. Your HTTP scheme is too much complicated to me as lecture reading :). I've tried to transform rebol.org webserver to R3, I've got response, but seems to me useles to serve one and one only connection at time when the port is asynchronous by nature. Any hint? |
Jerry 29-Nov-2009 [19818x2] | We've been through this, but I still have to bring it up. "REBOL 3 needs a new name" |
A new name, a new beginning, and a new reputation. | |
Henrik 29-Nov-2009 [19820] | What was the consensus last time? I still disagree about changing any names, btw. |
Jerry 29-Nov-2009 [19821x4] | I decided to use REBOL to develop our system a couple of months ago, and everyone was against me. Now the system was done, they were surprised at how quickly I did this using a scripting language. They considered this development process a good example of the productivity of scripting language. They want me to talk about it in front of 400+ employees in the tech department. But I am too afraid to say REBOL out loud in front of people now. I will call REBOL "a dynamic language" in the tech convention. I just cannot call it REBOL. Last time I did this, everyone was question me. |
So please please please rename REBOL to something else. | |
I remember Carl like the name "AltScript" | |
REBOL 3 beta is coming out soon. If we want REBOL to have a new name. This is the right time. | |
jocko 29-Nov-2009 [19825] | I would be also in favor of renaming Rebol. The impact on those who already know or use Rebol would not be negative, and it could be a good opportunity to launch a "new Rebol ", with a new image to the other. |
Henrik 29-Nov-2009 [19826x2] | Jerry, make sure you mention what REBOL stands for: Relative Expression Based Object Language |
I'm against changing the name for several reasons: - The name is established. It takes years to re-establish a new name to gain new momentum. Carl's company name needs to change as well. - You need to relate REBOL 2 with <new-language-name>. This requires effort and you'll have to waste a long time explaining this fact. - There are already too many *-script languages out there, which makes AltScript less distinctive. So, is it a Javascript or Applescript derivative or what? Downsides to REBOL: - The name is overused, which is why there are people against the name. - Pronounciation problem. - Pointy-haired boss problem (REBOL? REBEL? Hackertool.) - REBOL is sometimes confused as a COBOL or ALGOL derivative. - Had REBOL been named AltScript in the beginning, there may not have been a problem, but also no distinction. Suggestions: - Tone down the use of the name. Use the name as for a technology engine, rather than something end-users will confront, like DirectX or OpenGL. | |
Oldes 29-Nov-2009 [19828] | Jerry, why do you think that people who have problems with REBOL name will not have same problems with any other name? I think that changing name will not make things easier. They will be scared in the same way. Mostly that using something new is hazardous. For example if you are the only one in the company who knows how to program in REBOL, what if you will have some incident suddenly? This is nothing what renaming can solve. Anyway, such a discussions are usualy in Advocacy chat. |
Robert 29-Nov-2009 [19829] | I wouldn't change it. Python, Scheme, Java not very elegant as well. |
Rod 29-Nov-2009 [19830] | I agree with Henrik, both on not changing it and on the problem list. I've gotten past all that at work though, the development group knows what REBOL is and can talk about it in conversation just like they do Ruby (they are Java based primarily). One thing I do find that seems to give some relief on the name issue is just to call it R3. |
Brock 29-Nov-2009 [19831x3] | I also agree with Henrik, and believe that you really need to stress that the name was derived from an acronym as pointed out by Henrik. Once that is fully understood, the relationship to rebel or the negative meaning should be a thing of the past. The benefit is more people will be aware of the acronymn that was used to derive the name. |
I have colleagues that called Rebol REBOLa, likening it to a virus after a colleague's machine acted up after installing Rebol. It was coincidental as I have never in my years heard anyone else complain of a similar happening. | |
Carl should also emphasis the name being derived from the acronymn, directly on his website in big bold type, so it is more understood. | |
Janko 29-Nov-2009 [19834x2] | AltScript sounds like some yet another scripty thing to me.. nothing to remember it by .. They are scared because they don't know it, probably never heard of it so it's that what we have to change. I think the R3 openeness and new features will make it more approcable by the masses so there is a chance to spread. Also rebol community is qute self sufficient and closed in it's own world which doesn't help at being "everywhere". |
.. If you want it to sound right to the enterprisey people you should rename it to **JavaLisp** now that would be something that sounds right :) | |
Maxim 29-Nov-2009 [19836] | the use of R3 as a name is less annoying. I hate saying rebel in conversation when refering to it. it really doesn't give a good impression. which is why I do my best NOT to pronounce it rebel, but rEbOl. |
older newer | first last |