World: r3wp
[Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Dockimbel 23-Apr-2011 [1335] | Can't reproduce using: bar: func [a [integer!] b [integer!] return: [logic!]][ either zero? a [ either zero? b [ print "00" ][ print "11" false ] ][ false ] ] either bar 1 1 [print "KO"][print "OK"] either bar 0 1 [print "KO"][print "OK"] |
Kaj 23-Apr-2011 [1336] | I'll try that |
Dockimbel 23-Apr-2011 [1337] | This test code compiles and works OK. |
Kaj 23-Apr-2011 [1338x2] | #define no false |
is what triggers it | |
Dockimbel 23-Apr-2011 [1340x4] | Ok, got it. |
It is probably a 'false word reduction issue. | |
(in the preprocessor) | |
Kaj, I've just pushed a commit that should fix your issue. | |
Kaj 23-Apr-2011 [1344] | Thanks! |
Kaj 24-Apr-2011 [1345] | The fix works; or at least it compiles now |
Maxim 25-Apr-2011 [1346] | Doc, did you consider using the set-word! type for getting pointers to words? much like we use them to get function values, instead of calling functions... |
PeterWood 25-Apr-2011 [1347x3] | http://groups.google.com/group/red-lang/browse_thread/thread/6a7438458d2d170b |
I believe that the same "get-word" syntax will be used should function pointers be introduced at a later date | |
Though neither of these items are on the current to-do list. | |
BrianH 25-Apr-2011 [1350] | Maxim, that's the get-word! type. The set-word! type is used for assignment (setting). |
Dockimbel 26-Apr-2011 [1351] | I have already added the support for getting function's address using get-word! syntax (it returns an integer! value). Structs, c-strings, pointer are already passed by reference. |
Maxim 26-Apr-2011 [1352] | thx guys. |
shadwolf 2-May-2011 [1353x2] | I'm a hudge militant of both the typed variable way (easy to interface C libraries) and the untype variable ( code more readable less maintenance etc...) This paradoxe tends to push me to imagine a world where the software will know what I need what ever the real sturcture behind is lets call it predictable type variable. How we do that ? I don't know but it seems fun enough to spend some brain cells thinking of that. the idea is realy that interfacing external c/c++ java what ever library and maping it to the language innher variable and code will be absolutly transparent. (something like the .NET librabry browser but easier... Or more easyly we can have both system cohabiting side by side on the language schemes |
though in rebol not having type for vars and () for function arg submition, make difficult to identify var content distinguish var from function ... Maybe then a syntaxique item like th e $ in php for vars or the @ in ruby for tables would be an interesting point... Sorry I try to think about rebol syntaxe structure like someone seing it for the first time | |
BrianH 2-May-2011 [1355] | Shad, typed variables with type inference handles the readability/maintenance problem pretty well, which is why several statically typed languages have been retrofiting type inference into them recently. Fortunately, Red is planned around that from the start. Your "predictable type variable" proposal (I don't know the standard term either) sounds useful. Many languages do this through reflection facilities, but that kind of thing requires dynamically typed variables at least as an option if you are going to use the reflection facilities of the language you are interfacing with - this is necessary for C++ at least because there isn't a shared standard for encoding that information in a static way. It would be more useful for integrating with .NET or CORBA objects, since direct field access is prohibited anyways for those so there's no extra overhead in the field access itself, just in the runtime discovery, and ahead-of-time static compilation has shared rules that work on a binary standard. |
Awi 2-May-2011 [1356] | Somebody created an open source .NET Micro Framework port to Arduino http://netduino.com/netduino/specs.htm. It's an ARM7 based microcontroller. Is it possible that someday Red would be available on this platform (Reduino sounds really good)? Just dreaming... How would I start, if I could help? |
Dockimbel 3-May-2011 [1357] | Awi, that would be great, I would love to see Red run on such platform but I'm afraid Red's memory footprint would be a bit too high for a 60KB of RAM (but this might be specific to the netduino platform?). OTOH, Red/System compiler should work nicely there. If you want to help for such port, we need two things: - a target file format emitter (I guess it would be the firmware file format) - a native ARM7 code emitter as Red/System back-end. Let me know if you want to start working on these parts, I would provide additional documentations. |
Awi 3-May-2011 [1358] | I think Red/System is already much better than .Net or C. I will look into both things you mentioned, but to be honest I have zero experience on porting. But let me see what I can do. |
Dockimbel 8-May-2011 [1359] | I think I am going to port Red to this USB key size platform, once available: http://www.raspberrypi.org |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1360] | nice machine... i would love to try |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1361] | Neat gadget, but Ubuntu is going to bog it down |
Dockimbel 8-May-2011 [1362] | I would install a Damn Small distro instead. |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1363] | doc: khm, u wanted to say syllable, right? ;) |
Dockimbel 8-May-2011 [1364] | Sure! =) |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1365] | We'd have to port to ARM first |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1366x2] | i was thinking about syllable server. what has to be ported on it to arm? if u ubuntu runs on this thing, then the kernel and c compiler shouldnt be an issue |
no altme though... i can't use it as my development machine then ;D | |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1368x3] | We've had a pattern of people who came to our mailing list shouting enthusiastically that they had found out that the "GNU C compiler" would compile to PowerPC or something, that they would compile Syllable to it over the weekend and report afterwards |
We never heard from such people again | |
Sure most parts of Syllable Server have been ported to ARM in other projects, but porting the system will be many man months of work at best | |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1371] | thats why i was asking which parts are the problematic. i was just wondering if there is already an ubuntu running on that thing, then probably most of the build tools for syllable server are ready |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1372x2] | It's not that any of the parts is particularly problematic, it's that it's an awful lot of work with today's software bloat |
And if you don't know all the parts intimately, they can easily pose a big problem to a particular developer | |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1374] | ok, got it. i was building lfs back then , so i know what u r talking about |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1375] | Then you know that the ports of LFS to various architectures are separate projects, that are partly rearchitected |
onetom 8-May-2011 [1376] | i was just trying the x86 version, but i can imagine |
Kaj 8-May-2011 [1377] | It can easily take me half a year to create a next version of Syllable Server, and that's on the same architecture |
Pekr 9-May-2011 [1378] | Doc - there is many such small platforms, even x86 based IIRC. Gumstix is e.g. for real, a bit pricey, but definitely not vapor - http://www.gumstix.com/store/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=256 |
Dockimbel 9-May-2011 [1379] | Right, but not at $25 (the one you posted is sold $229). |
Pekr 9-May-2011 [1380x3] | Right, but is sold right now, without the "we plan to develop" attitude :-) |
I personally bought Beagleboard. Pandora Board might be even better .... | |
Small enough for us. | |
Kaj 9-May-2011 [1383] | I think we can have faith in David Braben |
Kaj 10-May-2011 [1384] | I have updated the 0MQ binding to the latest Red version, and moved it to a Fossil repository: |
older newer | first last |