World: r3wp

Sweet dreams :-)

Thanks Kaj, you too.

Thanks

Red's web forum now opened : http://groups.google.com/group/red-lang?hl=en

Thanks for posting all hat Doc. Looks like great progress so far.

If REBOL would have been open sourced the force of Doc would have 
improved REBOL and not splitted into RED.

Who says Red can't be used to improve REBOL? They're complementary.

Doc said you will be able to write R3 extensions in Red, instead 
of C :-)

It would still be nice, if Carl would completly open-source R3 though 
:-) Because it could lift certain amount of energy into some ppl 
confidence, and R3 could grow faster. Well - in theory, at least 
:-)

No argument here

Started a new blog : http://red-chronicle.blogspot.com/

And a Twitter : http://twitter.com/red_chronicle

Very nice. :-)

Red/System alpha 1 is now available: http://j.mp/gTnaX2

Seems REBOL/View is required:

>> do/args %rsc.r "%tests/hello.reds"
** Script Error: Feature not available in this REBOL
** Where: context
** Near: file-header: make struct! [

Doc, works well here. Keep it up!

Cyphre: thanks! Need to fix the README to point to R/View...can't 
believe that struct! is not supported by Core...Damn limitations...

Pushed three small fixes to https://github.com/earl/Red

(/View, some typos, and creation of the builds/ directory if it does 
not exist)

Oh, did the same...now need to learn how to merge and resolve conflicts 
with Git :-)

By the way, you currently have two public branches in your repo, 
one called "origin" and one called "master". I would suggest making 
"master" the default branch and dropping "origin".

Nah, don't mind. I just drop the /View fix and forward-port the other 
two.

Yes, I did a bad move with my git client and created two branches 
instead of one. Looking in github for a "drop branch" button.

Ok, my repository is updated containing only the two still relevant 
patches.

wau... it works:)

:-)

Forgot to mention in the blog, but << and >> operators are not implemented 
yet. They are defined in the compiler but lacks the backend part 
in the code emitter. Anyway, you can achieve the same using * and 
/ with powers of 2, they'll generate shifts instead of math ops.

Added the missing builds/ folder to the repo.

Congrats Doc :) .. I will be following this.

Since red/system is c-level and compiled you can't and don't plan 
to have runtime goodnes of rebol in it. But the code is still data, 
so do you think you could use compile time macros to keep the core 
simpler and solve many things with macros then (like lisps do)?

Are #define statements defining constants?

Brian: yes (afaict)

Will /Pro work, or is /View needed for something other than structs?

/Pro should be enough (just need struct! support AFAIR)

Janko: thanks! About compile-time macros: that's an option. You already 
have #define, but it's quite limited for now (no  multiline or parameters 
support).

I'm not sure adding macros at the "data" level (LOADed source) would 
be really needed. Once Red will be ready, you'll be able to compose 
Red/System dialect source code at Red level (with all the block! 
series power), as you do today in REBOL with VID, DRAW, or other 
dialects.

Can it output DLLs yet?

No, but it shouldn't be hard to add.

The linker needs to be extended to add an "export" section and the 
compiler needs to prepare some data to populate that section.

The R3 module system uses an export keyword for marking its exports. 
Perhaps Red/System can use the same keyword.

Sure, that part is the easy one...Having quick look at "export" section 
format, it seems to be as messed up as the "import" one. Would probably 
need several days to make it work reliably.

For that matter, will Red/System be getting a module system, or some 
other kind of packaging facility?

We won't want to be limited to one-file programs forever :)

I'll extend it to allow compiling several sources in a single executable, 
but I won't go past that. Red/System will live as a Red dialect, 
so will benefit from the whole Red environment. The only time it 
needs to work alone will be to produce the Red's runtime layer. But, 
as said in my blog, Red/System could be extended to a full-featured 
language if someone want to invest in it.

In fact, support for incremental compilation is almost done, just 
needs testing/debugging. With that, you could feed the compiler with 
several sources while preserving its internal states and ask to "finalize" 
the job on the last one (means link the project).

Works here Doc. Congratulations!

Thanks Gregg.

Build hello.exe under OS X and works under Windows :)

Red/System is a cross-compiler. ;-)

Let me get this straight: Is this instead of using C?