World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Dockimbel 13-Apr-2011 [1135] | You mean compilation workflow? |
Pavel 13-Apr-2011 [1136] | yes and maybe light enlightment of design (ie metacode is created by compiler or linker?) |
Dockimbel 13-Apr-2011 [1137x2] | metacode? If you mean the native code generation, it is done by the compiler. |
I'll see if I can make a short description on how it is organized. | |
Pavel 13-Apr-2011 [1139] | and what linker cares about, glues together multiple compiled source files? |
Dockimbel 13-Apr-2011 [1140x2] | Compiled source files are glued together by the compiler itself. The linker currently simply generates the right binary from compiled code, global data and external libs imports. The linker will be later extended to be able als to statically link external libraries. |
als => also | |
Pavel 13-Apr-2011 [1142] | so emitter is only helper? |
Dockimbel 13-Apr-2011 [1143] | Emitter module purpose is to isolate as much as possible target-specific code from the compiler. So, it provides target-independent helper functions to the compiler and for target-specific code, it loads one from %targets/ folder. |
Pavel 13-Apr-2011 [1144] | thx for description |
Dockimbel 13-Apr-2011 [1145] | The emitter module API is used by the compiler only when it can provide an added value, else the compiler taps directly in the target-specific code through a target-independant API. In other words, a new target module needs to implement all the current target API (all the emit-* functions in %IA.r) to be able to work with the compiler. |
Pekr 15-Apr-2011 [1146] | Doc - do you think we can get Red to the following page, or is it too preliminary? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages |
GrahamC 15-Apr-2011 [1147] | somewhat premature .. it's not in use yet |
Henrik 15-Apr-2011 [1148] | I agree. |
Dockimbel 15-Apr-2011 [1149x2] | Probably too early. |
Direct link to Red/System specifications draft changed, it is now available from: http://static.red-lang.org/red-system-specs.html | |
Pekr 18-Apr-2011 [1151] | I just visited the Haiku OS website, and I can see, that it was accepted for the Google summer of code 2011. Maybe once Red becomes an alpha, we could apply too? Let's say for 2012 :-) |
Dockimbel 18-Apr-2011 [1152] | Google Summer of Code is a global program that offers student developers stipends to write code for various open source software projects I wouldn't qualify for the "student developer" part. |
Kaj 18-Apr-2011 [1153x3] | No, you would qualify for the mentor part. So you'd have to find students willing to write open source Red code, and then you have to mentor them |
It's very hard to get into SoC, beginning with the rush to register, and if you don't have the organisation to conduct the mentoring, or your project is too eccentric for students to get into quickly, it's fairly pointless | |
It's also questionable if the students will go on to maintain their code. The biggest advantage if you do get in is simply the marketing, because people suddenly think you're associated with Google | |
Maxim 18-Apr-2011 [1156] | (and google also gets to notice you a little) |
Kaj 18-Apr-2011 [1157] | Yeah, so they can steal your ideas... I figure the cost is well worth it to them |
Dockimbel 18-Apr-2011 [1158] | Kaj: thanks for the insights. |
Maxim 19-Apr-2011 [1159x2] | Questions about the declarations. 1- why are you using this syntax for *all* declarations? : word: [datatype value] ex: my-val: [integer! 20] woudn't just this do ?: my-val: integer! 20 I find its a hell of a lot easier to read, and when you add type detection, its back to my-val: 20 meaning that the integer! word really is just a typecast operation here. |
since you are compiling and pre-filtering the source code, the integer! word really is contextual, what it means is inherently bound to where its found. so I see no issue with this use syntax. anyone care to debunk me? am I missing something? | |
Dockimbel 19-Apr-2011 [1161x3] | Where have you seen: my-val: [integer! 20] ? |
word: [datatype value] => I don't remember writing that in the specs? Maybe a typo? | |
Oh, I guess you're just refering to pointer! initialization? | |
Maxim 19-Apr-2011 [1164x2] | darn... I'm completely off.. yeah... I guess the old pointer documentation got me all mixed up. |
Doc, I have to say, the red docs are getting really nice. its clear now, and I was talking nonsense... I should have gone over them... will make sure to visit each time. they've significantly updated since last I visited. I was just taking a little break from all of the cheyenne dev. | |
Dockimbel 19-Apr-2011 [1166] | they've significantly updated since last I visited You are too used to R3's monthly updates...it's Red here, it's updated daily ;-) |
Maxim 19-Apr-2011 [1167x2] | hehe |
yeah, I forgot that Red lives in the same space-time continuum as the rest of us humans ;-) | |
Dockimbel 19-Apr-2011 [1169x3] | If you have looked at Red sources since a long time (like a week ;-)), you should look at the Quick-Test framework added yesterday by PeterWood: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/tree/master/red-system/tests (see the readme.txt) |
have => haven't | |
cd %red-system/tests/ do %run-all.r | |
Kaj 19-Apr-2011 [1172] | That's cheating, that was ported from Boron ;-) |
Dockimbel 19-Apr-2011 [1173x2] | hehe :-) |
Kaj: BTW, Andreas added ELF sections table support a few days ago, so, does it help a bit loading executables on Syllable? | |
Kaj 19-Apr-2011 [1175] | Yes, I saw that and want to test it, but I'm very busy. Maybe I'll get to it tomorrow |
PeterWood 19-Apr-2011 [1176] | Kaj :That's cheating, that was ported from Boron ;-) Not true. That was my initial intention but simple-test was felt to be too heavy for Red/System so I built a lighter one. By the way, the boron framework was ported from REBOL ... .... and back again :-) |
Kaj 19-Apr-2011 [1177] | OK. Sorry, I didn't mean it in the strict sense, more as predecession :-) |
BrianH 19-Apr-2011 [1178] | Given the potential licensing issue, it's best to be careful about that. *GPL is a one-way street. |
PeterWood 19-Apr-2011 [1179] | simple-test.b is just a script written in boron. I don't believe it is GPL because of that just as all Java code is not GPL because Java is GPL. |
BrianH 19-Apr-2011 [1180x2] | Cool. |
Though the "all Java code is not GPL because Java is GPL" thing doesn't apply to GPL2, which is why the Classpath exception was made. GPL3 fixes this though. | |
PeterWood 19-Apr-2011 [1182] | Oh, I didn't realise that Java was released under GPL2. I thought it was only under Sun's proprietary licence until it was issued under GPL3. |
BrianH 19-Apr-2011 [1183x2] | (getting off topic) The main problem was that GPL2 code *written* in Java was illegal to *run on* proprietary JVMs and link to even the bundled Java libraries. The same goes for GPL2 code written in REBOL. LGPL2 is a little more legal for running on proprietary languages, barely. |
There were and are a lot of popular GPL2 apps written in Java, but none of them are legal to run (ish, depending on distribution). | |
older newer | first last |