World: r3wp

capacity of the parser will be the main focus for on-going development.


I already have the complete C language parse rules from an older 
project, so I'll be slowing importing the rules into this engine.

Some good SWIG-like tools will helpe people a lot.

using comments in the C source, you can give instructions to the 
engine on alternate bindings and rebol test code you wish to compile.


the advantage is that these comments are side-by-side with the original 
C source file, so its easy to maintain.

I guess there will be a lot of more work and testing ;-)

what current limitations you have and in what timeframe you could 
solve them?

the current code is a single ~16kb file,  so its not too large right 
now.


obviously as more types are added, this will grow, but since I'm 
using a "rebol-formatted intermediate source tree", its easy to improve.


the parser just generates a version of the C source in this "RFIST" 
format, and the generator only has to convert this into something 
else.


in time, we might even build different emitters for the "RFIST" data.

limitiations, well, just the scope of supported datatypes, both in 
C and in REBOL commands.

others than that its working very well.

one fun thing is that we do not have to use the C source types as 
the interfaces for the commands.

my next test is to build a generic object to parameter map.

so, if you have a C func declared as:
int myFunc (int a, int b)

you'll be able to call it from rebol using:

obj: context [a: 1 b: 2]
myFunc obj

yes please! :))

its funny how the extension API feels like writting assembly  :-D

@Carl .. you called my suggestion insane, and now you post this blog 
http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0327.htmlsaying that you will do it 
anyway!

he's being pressured by everyone   :-)

he feels the love   ;-D

Ok, so join the asylum ...

and my tests (with a fix or two)  and successfull builds probably 
helped him be a bit more confident.

daily or perhaps less frequently releases are the way to go

this is a genetic approach :)

And my other suggestion about releasing a linux version also still 
stands

The linux users tend to be more experienced and yet they are being 
excluded in this process

The rebol 2.7.7 View problems on linux were reported way back and 
it' s only now that they are being addressed ...

We should parallelize testing and development.

As for flooding curecode with tickets ... I've already offered my 
Jira instance to be used until the hostkit has been stabilized

my extension building engine will probably be released tomorrow. 
  its currently building extensions which are 100% functional.


now I will add more types and implement the command interface directive 
so that we can mutilate how C code is bound on the REBOL side.

So, Robert .. where is the A101 build?

Carl has to merge some of my fixes first.

cause right now you can't compile extensions as DLLs... a small side-effect 
of the implementation of pair floats.... just related to linking.

Eh??  Of course you can compile extensions as DLLs... that's done 
outside of Rebol. But A101 won't allow you to use them any more?

no the hostkit release broke this capability when you compile the 
DLL, there is a problem in the order of #include... but its fixed, 
will be part of release... which Carl has confirmed is happening 
very soon (probably today)

So A102 is out today?

it will be v101

and yes probably, but I can't talk for carl, but he seems commited 
to doing it.

Carl is doing the release because Maxim committed to doing the testing. 
This means Maxim gets the prereleases, and we get the releases.

its funny because the #include bug left me in rage as I was trying 
to fix my makefile (I'm VERY poor at this stuff) .


but 2 hours later, editing my scripts, makefiles and stuff, I can 
say that I've grown to understand make quite well... 

so this bug ended up being a good thing  :-)

I feel like this release is my own pet release... Carl added the 
object! handling in extensions just for me... so I felt a certain 
responsability in working with carl to test it.

Is the only way for an extension to communicate back to r3 is by 
altering the frame parameters?

Is there no way for an extension to call a R3 function?

not safelly. 


 while in the command, if you run arbitrary code, the GC might swap 
 the references you have while your in the command.  so that when 
 you return values, the data they used to refer ot do not exist anymore!

man exceptions are quick. 


more than 4 million adds a second, even though the values are cast 
to 32 bits and its using a stub (it jumps into a C function from 
a library) .

Seems like I should be able to call Qt's sql or network functions

So this http://doc.trolltech.com/3.3/sql.html#4should work for 
DB access for R3

But I guess you're going to have to open and close a new connection 
for each query which is not very satisfactory

http://www.rebol.com/r3/downloads/r3-host-kit-a101.zip

And, thank Maxim for his help on testing it.

And see my general rant at:
http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0327.html

Ah, I see Graham posted it.  Yes, insane. the pressure... was... 
too... intense.

So, now with that out, let me see about getting the posix release 
too... then one of you can port the graphics to X win.

I want an Amiga version...   ;-)

and it has to run faster than the PC version which has a 1000 times 
faster CPU  ;-D

funny thing is that getting an amiga version to work probably would 
take the least time of all OSes... its so clean.