World: r3wp

Also, people installing View on Linux to try Red might encounter 
issues related to View installation.

I'm using it on the graphical version now, that we can't release 
because the integration with BogoLinux X packages is too brittle

Yep

I might have already lost a few potential users just because of that.

They told you?

One told me that IIRC, he didn't want to accept the licensing terms 
that the View installer was asking him to accept.

I can't sell web sites because my site builder is running in REBOL, 
which people can't get installed

Yeah, we've had one paranoid tell us he wouldn't install AltME because 
it's a binary :-/

:-)

He must be running FreeBSD ;-)

No, he once built his own security optimised Debian distro

Did I meet him at ReBorCon2011?

You sat across the table from him :-)

In the restaurant

I guessed so. ;-)

We also found him in the 0MQ contributors list :-)

hehe :-)

PCBSD: the installer is not able to activate the network card, tried 
both DHCP and manual configuration...

That's disappointing; I would have expected it to be better

But that happens with operating systems once you try them...

The DHCP option worked fine with FreeBSD.

Sounds very Linux: you need DHCP and X, and you have one distro that 
does DHCP, and another that does X :-/

It's the universe's way to tell you you won't win in this life...

I spent 1h trying to make them work, I should have spent that time 
on getting rid of /View instead. ;-)

I once decided to spend the time I needed to waste configuring Windows 
and Linux to make my own operating systems :-)

I wonder if I could not provide my own custom REBOL interpreter instead 
using the SDK.

:-)

Rebpro binary provides the features I need without the View issues.

It's very debatable whether you would be exposing the REBOL API :-)

This is supposed to work, isn't it?

as-message: "zmq_msg_init_data" [  ; Convert to new message.
	message		[message!]
	data		[byte-ptr!]
	size		[size!]
	free		[function! [data [byte-ptr!] hint [handle!]]]
;	free		[handle!]
	hint		[handle!]
	return: 	[integer!]
]

Yes, it should work.

*** Compiler Internal Error: Script Error : compare-func-specs expected 
cb argument of type: get-word 
*** Where: check-expected-type 
*** Near:  [unless any [
all [
block? expr 
object? expr/1 
expr/1/action = 'null 
type: expected 
any-pointer? expected/1
] 
all [
type 
any [

How do you call AS-MESSAGE?

It's when passing it NULL:

either as-logic as-message message data size none none [

ah! :-)

Null is not a replacement for function!.

It does need to be in this function

That is to say; if a C function has a fixed parameter list, can it 
be called with fewer arguments?

I don't think so. The called function will try to get its missing 
arguments from stack anyway.

Then I need to pass NULL

You should make 2 bindings, one with function!, other with handle! 
(for passing Null). And a wrapper function for the latter one, to 
make it cleaner for the user.

I will look into the compiler internal error tomorrow, it needs a 
fix anyway.

OK

Will you implement it, or add a warning?

I need to see if extending Null to support function! pseudo-type 
is problematic or not.

Too late now, it will be on my todo list for tomorrow.

OK, I will also leave it 'til tomorrow

My radio just starts singing the same :-)