World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3919x4] | ok another question i know i'm a bother ... but if us tiny bunch of crazy fans we don't ask us silly asks we will never get steps further and get rebol writed in history. So the crazy is is why not doing rebol in java instead of C or C++ ? I mean now in days having rebol based on java what are the possible gains ? 1) Easier way to handle multiplateform 2) Big big java comunity and so getting strong specialised people to enhance rebol VM will be easier. 3) no need to adapt algorithms across plateform. 4) all the curent technologies are adapted to java. the bad points are: 1) jre weights alot and rebol being based on it will not be stand alone so it will need the jre to be installed to run 2) goodbye AGG 3) interfacing with java libraries can be problematic. I think the good points overcome the bad points. |
but the kind of interface we can do with java is that -> http://uploads.siteduzero.com/files/111001_112000/111843.jpg | |
i know rebol wants to be something else ... but that's the main reason why rebol isn't not being use more extensively and is so much undergrounded... | |
i like hte idea of rebol being something else based on the language at fame ... REbol can be thinked as an abstraction why using this language instead of this other to build rebol ? Since the goal is to make rebol way to build software the way to build software widely in the futur ... s | |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3923x2] | Add a few bad points: 4) We would have to throw all of the current code away and start over. 5) The semantics of REBOL have very little in common with Java, so we would be very limited in what Java libraries we could use. 6) The JVM is much worse at dynamic languages than its competitors, such as the CLR. 7) SLOW. This might tip the tables in the other direction. |
Most of the Java technologies mentioned in positive point 4 would be unavailable or awkward to use because of the semantic mismatch. | |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3925] | Brianh's bad point: 4) hum yes but maybe you will attrack some more hella programers ultra specialised that will help us do the translation ... 5) the semantic and datatypes of rebol have few in comon with C/C++ 6) yes but looking at the jobs offers now in day most of them aorund 70% are based on java jdbc job offers ... 7) slow but now we have 4 to 6 cores processors that was a good excuses 10 years ago but today that's not... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3926] | But if you make this change: "doing rebol in java instead of C or C++" -> "doing another rebol in java in addition to the current C/C++ version" Then you can get rid of bad points 1, 2 and 4. And add a good point: 5) R3 for Android. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3927] | brianH Rebol on android i say Woooooooooooooooohooooooooooooo that smells good and iphone too since apple doesn't seems to be willing to support flash but have no problems with java |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3928] | 4) "ultra specialised that will help us do the translation" Manual translation. The code would not be comparable, and the entire implementation strategy would need to change because of the differences between C and Java. 5) REBOL doesn't have classes. And accessing C libraries from REBOL is awkward too. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3929] | brianH any way you know scripting language have the reputation to be the slow pokes in computing area ... so basing them on java shouldn't make the difference |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3930] | You are underestimating just how fast R3 is, when compared to other interpreted languages. Orders of magnitude better. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3931] | ok lets be frantic and compare rebol with tcl/tk, perl, python, ruby. All those scripts langage have in common to use GNU bases main portable libs so the community making them grow and known is bigger than our community 1000 times ... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3932] | It's the replacement idea that is bad. We can make a vaguely REBOL-like language for Java that is good enough to interoperate with the C-based R3, but throwing away the R3 codebase like you said and starting over would kill the language and make us wait another 5-10 years. The "instead of" part is a BAD IDEA. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3933] | BrianH R3 is stuck in alpha since 3 years and it will take 3 more years to be officially released ... and mean while we keep a design based on 90's year design i mean it implicates too a lot of difficulties that can't be overcomed easyly |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3934x2] | Perl, Python and Ruby are compiled, and so is TCL now. They are not interpreted. |
R3 is not stuck in alpha. What you are doing is suggesting throwing away a codebase and starting over. Perl 6 did that and they are still in alpha after 10 years. | |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3936] | BrianH yes that can be a side project ... but it have to be seriously done not another abandoned clone project that convince no one and get no support... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3937] | As long as the clones are (L)GPL they will get no support. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3938x2] | BrainH yes they are compiled but using the Glib the GTK+ libs etc GNU libs and tools so people feels more confortable to contribute |
BrianH but what is the purpose to have a deposited thing no one want to use ... | |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3940] | I am saying that you can't compare their speed to that of REBOL, because REBOL's semantics require interpretation. All successful languages on the JVM are compiled, because interpreters are just too slow on that platform. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3941] | truth is you say to 100 programers java they all knows what it's about you say ruby 60% of them eard about it you say rebol in the best case if you have 2 guys that eard about it you are lucky |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3942] | So? That is not an excuse to do the number-one worst thing that you can ever do as a programmer. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3943x2] | can we keep rebol in the shadows doesn't it impact it's spread to keep it in the actual model ... |
BrianH i heard alot java sux etc ... but truth is it's the most wanted language now in day ... and you can't tell it will be better or not for rebol we didn't tryed ... and if java is not your prefered ok how about mono (the GPL ed C# package) but mono have less visibility than java. | |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3945x3] | I have no problem with there being a semi-compatible R3 clone based on Java, and if I buy an Android phone I will start such a clone. But it will not replace R3 because that code is useful for many people *now*, and doesn't have any of the significant downsides of the JVM and its ilk, which is part of what makes it useful. And any clone that is based on (L)GPL can't share code with R3, so anyone who wants to help the community can't contribute it it. |
Shadwolf: Java is the most wanted *language*, not platform. It's the platform that sucks. | |
The platform sucking is why there are so many Java jobs, because Java is the new COBOL. | |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3948] | brianH thing is no one consider rebol as a reliable programing solution .. apart a hundred of crazy us ... you know sometimes the marketing thing is better than the truth ask microsoft about it :) |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3949] | I don't have to. If I considered their opinion to be valid, I would be working for them. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3950] | and in that hundred of fanatics you have only 10 to 20 guys participating to the REBOL project actively ... personally i don't feel motivated to help apporting my know how to a project that will feed someone else without retribution i think as american you understand my point buissness is buissness ... I don't work for free for a project that will bring money to someone else.. that's plain and simple ... And it will be different if it was organised as a foundation people give the money they want and then the monney is splitted to remunerate the contributions according to their importance ... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3951x2] | I have no problem with doing what it takes to get REBOL interoperating with Java and .NET (particularly Silverlight). It's just a matter of resources. It's the "instead of" idea that is bad. |
I don't work for free for a project that will bring money to someone else - So much for any community, free software or open source project then. Stick to proprietary software or work-for-hire. | |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3953x2] | brianH we are not anough to end properly R3 in a time span that don't mean a decade ... so the instead of is in the actual situation a logical thing we can't be doing 3 kind of rebol VM at same time ... |
brianH wrong in the worst case i can retain my ideas and improvements for ruby for myself and then make my own monney on selling my work ... wich is out of consideration in rebol ... | |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3955] | You can't make money off of selling improvements to Ruby itself. The development tools market doesn't work that way anymore. The way you make money is to make stuff with the tools, not to make the tools. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3956] | all i can do in rebol is selling the programs i do using rebol... but what credibility i have imagine my clients how they work they give me specs i propose them to do it in rebol they say no because if you get any problem we the client will not be able to get easyly a substitute to you to retake your work and get it enhanced ... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3957] | Since you haven't been participating as much, you don't know how far along we are, so you don't understand how incredibly dumb it would be to scrap the code base and start over. We are only working on one VM. If someone else wants to start another project, fine, but they should have a good case for allocating the resources, and not do anything to preclude others from helping them. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3958] | BrianH hum and no people asked for my help neither ... supposing i could bring some help which is not the case i think... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3959] | I have on many occasions asked for contributions and help, and many have answered. If you feel that you can't help, you will be missed but we will make do. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3960] | i know but my way to help is different but not uninterresting ... and franckly i'm maybe one of the few more interrested in what can be done with rebol than what can be done to improve rebol ... what is the meaning of adding things if we already don't use what exists in rebol ? |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3961x2] | If I start up a project for R3 interoperability with Java would you help? Don't worry, I won't use a (L)GPL license so you won't be prevented from working on other projects with the code you write. |
Note: Interoperability, not necessarily cloning (unless that is what is required). Improving the development process on the Java platform would be the goal. | |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3963] | if i can if i have access to the whole source code, but i will try ... most of the time i need to see the big picture to get ideas on how to proceed ... a mono C# clone intent have been tryed 4 years ago it was spirit then sudently the author disapeared and that's it ... |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3964] | Because Java sucks. This is why Scala and Clojure exist too. |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3965] | (i just discorverd the font size growth button in altme i'm happy ) |
BrianH 21-Jul-2010 [3966] | That was the aA button I mentioned :) |
shadwolf 21-Jul-2010 [3967x2] | scala clojured never heard about them sorry |
BrianH yes indeed thank you i didn't read that part .... with such tiny fonts i don"t read all sorry ... | |
older newer | first last |