World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
Pekr 2-Feb-2011 [7371] | Henrik - you mean from R2? |
Henrik 2-Feb-2011 [7372x2] | wait... I retract "working". I've not read the code, but Cyphre has done it a few days ago. |
Pekr, no a new implementation. | |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7374] | pekr, as I understand it the system right now needs to be updated in order to allow external developpers to properly integrate into the port/scheme model. would be nice that this be addressed so that Kaj could have already done it. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7375] | Brian tells me it should be possible to wrap cURL's features in R3 schemes, but I can't make it a priority yet |
Pekr 2-Feb-2011 [7376] | I thought so - so it is a RMA stuff. And Carl most probably taking an easy route of finish R3? I hope this is not going to be an extension, but that encryption ports are part of kernel? |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7377] | weren't there some problems with the code that someone trying to do their own schemes brought up? can't remember the details. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7378] | Async devices would be very nice to do it properly, though |
Pekr 2-Feb-2011 [7379] | Maxim - no, it was just Graham doing port schemes. Carl was supposed to revise them for inclusion or something like that. Graham gave up, as typically no feedback was received. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7380] | I have doubts that scheme wrappers can support all efficiency tactics of cURL, but all REBOL scheme features should at least be possible |
Henrik 2-Feb-2011 [7381] | Pekr, I don't know the deep details and I can't access the source (SVN trouble), but I can see one of the goals being that some parts are logically implemented in REBOL, because that makes them easy to maintain, rather than sifting through C code. |
Pekr 2-Feb-2011 [7382x2] | But - I am all for architecture related stuff - so e.g. security, improving extension mechanism including devices, new streamed codec model, threading (not because I think it is important, but because I think that it might have some implications on how some underlying stuff is organised) |
I would really welcome, if Carl would start to communicate, not cutting the rest of the community off. Seeing last R3 related blog or Twitter message dated back to November really makes bad impression ... | |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7384] | threading is extremely important in real life apps which require performance. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7385x2] | And simple responsiveness |
If you have no threading and no async, you can forget multimedia | |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7387] | exactly ... and servers too. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7388] | Servers such as Cheyenne can get by with multi-process |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7389] | but the real reason threading has to be done is because of the side-effects it will have on all the rest. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7390] | Yep |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7391] | but threading makes a lot of things on a server possible which cannot be done *practically* using multi-process. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7392] | Very high scalability, yes |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7393] | read access to shared memory is a big deal in handling sessions for example. |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7394] | Yes, I will eventually need that for an application server |
Maxim 2-Feb-2011 [7395x2] | it also saves on RAM, and I could do multi-processing liquid nodes, for example... right now its impossible to do. |
or rather currently *unsafe* since the thread model in R3 has some limitations. | |
Henrik 2-Feb-2011 [7397] | I can see that, and I'm not sure when work on threading will start or if Carl is studying it behind the scenes. All I can see is that many things right now are being handled on RM Asset needs, which right now is very focused on bringing certain tools to life. In that, there is work on GUI and database connectivity. The SSL discussion was initially brought up by Cyphre as he talked about his prototype (which I now read is in fact done in R2, sorry). Carl gladly accepted this and asked for specification on what needs to be implemented natively to make it all work. |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7398] | Henrik, kust for curiosity. Which database connectivity ?PostgreSQL, MySQL ? |
BrianH 2-Feb-2011 [7399] | ODBC? |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7400] | ODBC? or ODBC! |
Kaj 2-Feb-2011 [7401] | OpenDBX, I guess |
Robert 2-Feb-2011 [7402] | At the moment we use SQLite and the goal is to use SQLAPI++ to map to all kind of backends. |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7403x2] | Rober, will that work be open to the community or closed to RM Assets. Which licence model ? |
The same question for R3-GUI | |
Robert 2-Feb-2011 [7405x2] | R3-GUI is open. |
SQLAPI++ is a commercial lib. The extension for R3 will be available. If the source as well I don't know yet. This depends on what we use internally. | |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7407] | So SQL Lite will be open too ? (I have seen, 249$ for SQLAPI++ is not so much) |
Robert 2-Feb-2011 [7408] | Yes. I have a rough prototype but not in real-life use at the moment... step by step. |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7409x2] | In the last months I have changed to passive mode. Too many changes from everywhere... |
So when GUI and SQLite will come they will be welcome. | |
Robert 2-Feb-2011 [7411] | We are working on it every day. And the speed is raising as a lot of base code has been done now... |
GiuseppeC 2-Feb-2011 [7412] | Robert, since RM Assets has put some on their future project on REBOL3 things are going at light speed. Your choise has been a risk for your company because you put some important applications on a alpha project. (R3). Thanks in advance from everyone. |
GrahamC 3-Feb-2011 [7413] | possible? worthile? foreach [ a b c 3 d e ] list [ ... 3 = skip 3 elements ] |
Cyphre 3-Feb-2011 [7414x2] | To clarify the SSL stuff: Since the SSL is a layer on top of TCP the idea was that R3 will have all the neccesary encryption algorithms (RSA,DH, DSA, RC4, SH256 etc.) probably in form of embedded extension as part of the host-kit. These algorithms needs to be fast so they will be in C (probably ported from the R2 codebase if possible). Then the SSL/TLS protocol itself won't be written in C as it was in R2 but just done in R3 script. This way the protocol code will be: -smaller in size than the C version -easier to maintain because it is Rebol language, for example we can add 'server mode', certificate validation (simmilar to web browsers) etc. -crossplatform as much as Rebol script can be So far I did simple TLS implementation in R2 to prove that concept. The prototype is ~20KB of rebol script and uses only the build in encryption ports in R2. It covers most of the TLS functionality that is written natively in in form of 'tls scheme. So the next step is to get the encryption math to R3 (which can be useful not only for SSL so it is definitely worth doing that) and then try how the prototype will behave. |
Also, to bring some positive news...one note from Carl: "So, just an FYI, R3 is running on ARM now." I thought most of people here wanted to hear such thing :) | |
Pekr 3-Feb-2011 [7416x3] | Cyphre - very good work, and good aproach too imo ... |
WTF with ARM? Unbelievable :-) | |
Almost missed that note :-) | |
AdrianS 3-Feb-2011 [7419] | great to hear about ARM support - do you have any idea if this is just core or inc. graphics? |
Robert 3-Feb-2011 [7420] | Just core. |
older newer | first last |