r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3 Priorities] Project priorities discussion

Maxim
19-Nov-2009
[350]
btw it looks as though I might get some funding to build Elixir  
:-D
Henrik
19-Nov-2009
[351]
also FreeBSD, it seems
Pekr
19-Nov-2009
[352]
Shake is not good because of LLVM-like low level imo, but because 
of properly Graph based GUI. Now allow us something like that for 
View, and you get-me-interested :-) http://www.apple.hu/hun/mac/shake/shake/shake.html
Cyphre
19-Nov-2009
[353]
Maybe I'm missing something but you can do graph-based processing 
even with R2.  There is really no special needs at the low-level.
Maxim
19-Nov-2009
[354x2]
pekr... wrt shake... and what do you think the graph does ?  ;-) 
 


the graph is compiled in real-time everytime you change its structure. 
 you can create your own nodes and add them to the engine, using 
the graph itself as a visual development platform.


 as I said, I worked for those guys... I have an intricate knowledge 
 of how it works.  I also implemented a REBOL implementation of shake 
 callings its rendering engine and intepreting its (C) Header files 
 to integrate all the nodes.  :-)
yes, in R2, globs is such an engine, and it works very well.
Cyphre
19-Nov-2009
[356]
Regarding JIT/VMs: Recently I spent some time looking into this area. 
After the short investigation I believe JIT compiler which can be 
really useful(and fast enough) for Rebol can be written in kilobytes 
of code not megabytes.
Henrik
19-Nov-2009
[357]
They still sell Shake? I thought it was discontinued a couple of 
years ago.
Maxim
19-Nov-2009
[358x4]
yep.  but shake's technology was embeded within other apple tools. 
 the original nothing real guys still work at apple, all these years 
later  :-)
a VERY cool and somewhat, excentric, group of people hehe... nothing 
real parties at tradeshow events like siggraph... usually where the 
most sought after events...   S&M show with boobs on fire :-)  nude 
circus acts.  world-renowned dj's doing the music... ahh... those 
where the good times.
now.. you've got stuck-up companies like autodesk litterally controlling 
the whole industry with parties which would make your grandma wish 
she could leave early.  ;-)
shake still today is preferred for very large effects shots... it 
can layer 500 full frame cinema images (2048p or more) using a few 
hundred megs of RAM.  other softwares need 8GB of RAM just to handle 
10. and render exponentially slower.
Pekr
19-Nov-2009
[362]
So Max - when do we get FullHD editing in R3? :-)
Maxim
19-Nov-2009
[363]
give me a few months  ;-)
Pekr
19-Nov-2009
[364]
... so you want to do in few months, what was not done in 12 years 
of View's existence? Cool then :-)
Maxim
19-Nov-2009
[365x2]
a lot of the stuff is already coded... it just needs to be translated 
for R3.
it took me just a few hours to have OpenGL running in an extension.... 
 which includes downloading all the OGL libs, and C compiler and 
stuff.
Maxim
7-Dec-2009
[367]
well, for those of you who are on devchat... you can see my (humorous) 
host-lib compilation post there, but for all others... just I just 
want to tell the world that... 

ITS ALIVE!!!! hehehahahahaha (evil grin and laugther)...


yep, I am on the short list of lucky individuals who got the host 
code, and it compiled the very first time I tried, so, mission accomplished 
and congratulations to Carl.
Rebolek
7-Dec-2009
[368]
Maxim - on Windows, or some other system?
Maxim
7-Dec-2009
[369x2]
on windows... I  don't have my Mac setup for compiling yet.
Cyphre has reported compiling on code::blocks (don't know what OS)
Rebolek
7-Dec-2009
[371]
OK, and what compiler have you used?
Maxim
7-Dec-2009
[372x2]
MSVC express edition... the free version.
so far, I really like the Device model, there's nothing like C OOP 
without the ++  

Exactly like the Amiga philosophy used to be.  :-)


I guess C++ coders will just be screaming as to why this isn't all 
classes and objects...  but its simple to code in any case
BrianH
7-Dec-2009
[374x3]
As long as the host code can be integrated into existing C++ code 
that's good for me. I'll be testing that ASAP.
Just being able to compile the host source with a C++ compiler would 
be sufficient - having declarations still work, for instance. The 
rest could be handled with shim code, basicaly what most of the host 
code is anyways.
So far, that is - see recent blogs for details.
Robert
8-Dec-2009
[377]
I try all to keep away from C++ these days. It just gives to much 
hassles when going from one compiler to the next.
Pekr
18-Dec-2009
[378x2]
Guys, there's a trouble with OS-X or so it seems. Any experienced 
OS-X coder to help? Message from Carl on R3 Chat:


I must set OS X on the back burner... I've wasted far too much time 
on it.

There are three choices on it:
1. find a tool that does what 
I need
2. make a tool that does what I need
3. join all the sources 
into one large .c compile

Note that gcc -fvisibility=hidden does 
not work, nor does __private_extern__ wor
k either.

I've got to 
get on with other projects now. So, if you happen to find the soluti
on, 
let me know. (PS, yes, using GCC > 4.0.)
Some explanation:


Back to OS X, the problem is that they're not really libs, they're 
.a's. This ev
en appears to be the case when -dynamic-lib is used.

I 
should mention that I've had -dynamic-lib built OS X libr3 and host 
working fo
r several days. But, the libr3 isn't in the form I want, 
because it's not intern
ally linked and resolved. Examining it with 
nm it looks like just a concat of .o
 files.

Specifically, I want 
all internal symbols resolved, and I only want to export th
e library 
interface.

If OS X only builds libs (dynamic or otherwise) as concatenated 
.o files, that's
 a serious breach of coding ethics! There are two 
reasons:

1. it means I can link against the internal interfaces 
- a serious short circuit
 in code encapsulation rules.

2. it means 
I can discover the entire internal structure of any product... say 
I
 want to peek inside Photoshop to see how it does something.

If 
I nm a lib that's been properly prepared, I should only see its API, 
nothing
else. So far, this has not been possible on OS X.

I suppose 
I could easily confirm this by nm'ing some of the various apps I 
have
on OS X and checking if I can see their internals. Let's hope 
not.

BrianH
18-Dec-2009
[380]
Wow, that explains why Apple has to sue developers for using undocumented 
APIs instead of just not exporting them.
Janko
18-Dec-2009
[381]
wow
BrianH
18-Dec-2009
[382]
Well, I think I found the solution - it looks like Carl's assesmenmt 
of dylibs was wrong. Solutions posted in reply to him in chat.
Maxim
18-Dec-2009
[383:last]
I've been under that impression myself... but haven't found an exact 
solution.