World: r3wp

oops .. sorry, because of 2 links from Kaj I thought this is the 
links channel

Yeah, Pieter is in Texas these days

http://www.osnews.com/story/25481/Developers_Must_Unite_For_Mobile_App_Portability

For russian readers, article about Red: http://www.linux.org.ru/news/opensource/7209300


72 comments... I don't know if it's globally positive or not, I guess 
that skepticism would dominate, which is understandable. As Kaj said, 
you need to present three times before making a sale. ;-)

It would be probably best to stop reporting RED is related to REBOL, 
and introduce its paradigms as a new rocket science :-)

ditto for Syllable. But I am not sure OSNews.com would publish language 
alpha state news, if not OS related. I tried to report on R3 alpha 
and some milestones, and it was refused ...

I'm slowly disconnecting them. The current article wasn't about Syllable 
anymore, but Red has a track record on OSNews now :-)

I don't know if they would report on it without any connection, though. 
There are simply too many languages. It must be notable somehow

I hardly mentioned REBOL anymore, either, but it's necessary to introduce 
Red

Finally I will be able to help a bit with a donation ... it's done! 
Will do better next time - New year was rough in terms of personal 
expenses - Keep up the good work everybody. For tring things a bit 
I recently ordered a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 inches android tablet 
- I will receive it shortly and will try to test somewthing with 
it ... Don't know what for now but looking for something. For now 
I'm learning iOS programming in the mean time using Objective-C which 
I also have to learn ... A lot of new stuff going on.

Maniacs make the system. Square parenthesis instead of curly they 
are clearly not attract many new people.

That's the gist of the Russian comments

*Sigh*

Yeah...

Comment back that the same could be said of Python's no-bracket syntax 
 ;)

I've had the same argument with someone for several years now, only 
about round parentheses...

The people who are supposed to be wise don't get it, either:

By the way, not like any readable Haskell.

>>----- Quote ---->>

Lisp with square parenthesis?
<<----- Quote 
---- <<

Yes, another 
Lisp for the poor" "

And one light:

Cheers, been waiting for this release

well, if people are judging a language on that, then it's impossible 
to discuss it on a higher level.

I wonder now, what people generally thought of C, when it came out. 
Of course things were slightly different back then.

2 more watchers of the github repository.

My floating point support todo-list for Red/System:


http://groups.google.com/group/red-lang/browse_thread/thread/5fe1e6bde8576d51?hl=en

what is that channel? If a new one, a forum, please add it to the 
Community section on red-lang.org?

btw - did not Ladislav do something with floating and rounding C 
level support for R3? Maybe you could consult with him ....

btw - I would not hesitate to post that info as a normal blog article 
on a red-lang.org, or some ppl might miss it?

what is that channel?
 Just the Red's mailing-list, nothing new there.

Ruby's author Matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) tweeting about Red: http://t.co/rUZtxSOE

Well, the floating point support is just planned for now, not even 
a work in progress, I'll blog about it when it will be more tangible.

Wow Doc , EPIC ..

I predict rebol-like will be going mainstream in 2 years :)

If we do things right, it is not impossible. ;-)

my webapps (latest one is wip timetracking) code is getting cleaner 
and shows more benefits with every itteration. And all in direction 
only rebol-like langs (not even lisps) can provide AFAIK. And ages 
away from classical / python / ruby code.

(and I am not even that good at reabol .. some code that I saw at 
powermezz was also nothing I've seen before)

like nothing

Just a question towards the RED possible performance. Are all RED 
natives going to be implemented in Red/System? There might be possible 
cases, where RED is going to be slower than REBOL, no? E.g. SORT 
- in REBOL, it goes directly to the C level. If RED compiles to RED/System, 
and SORT is going to be written in RED/System, which will be surely 
slower than C, then there will be cases, when RED is slower than 
REBOL? Well, we might as well implement SORT or math intensive stuff 
in C directly, as kind of cross-platform lib, and pass it over, but 
then such a library would have to be compiled for all platforms ...

Once we'll work on optimizing Red, we'll use the fastest routines 
available for critical code parts. For SORT, I'm not sure it will 
be slower, but if it's the case, we'll use the C version.

I mean we'll use qsort() if faster than the equivalent in Red/System. 
Building a runtime lib in C for Red is not necessary, that would 
defeat one of the purpose of Red/System.

if I were to use SOURCE on a native! in Red, would it show the actual 
source?

Watching your floating point support, another question - is it possible 
(later) for Red/System to evelve into general C wrapper? I mean - 
that I would not need to use C, but Red/System, maybe plus inlined 
C/ASM, having math operations including floats? But maybe that's 
not Red/System intended purpose even in the long run?

As I understand it, the priority is to support such features in Red/System 
recently, to allow 1) wrapping of external libraries 2) provide enough 
of ground for RED itself to be compiled into ...

Red/System has supported that from the start

The point of developing an own low level language with an own compiler 
is to not need C and a C compiler. Which is something we can use 
very well in Syllable, for example

RED/System, which will be surely slower than C.


There's no reason for that to be necessarily the case. Red/System 
is a compiled, low-level language; at the very same level as C.

And as Kaj already said as well, Red/System is actually not only 
to "evolve into general C wrapper?", it is meant to actually replace 
C (for some purposes). Red/System aims to interface nicely with native 
libraries (which are, more often than not, created by using C).

The only reason that Red/System would be slower than C would be if 
the C optimizer were better than the Red/System optimizer. The languages 
have similar semantic models and are implemented similarly - they 
are in the same class, more or less.

I can only hope that Red's SORT will be more correct than the one 
in R3, which has known bugs :(

It will be slower in average especialy for looping intensive computations 
like the sorting algorithms. I don't think the Red compiler can remain 
simple and beat a full featured optimizing c compiler.