World: r3wp
[World] For discussion of World language
older newer | first last |
Maxim 22-Dec-2011 [758] | I'm not sure about allowing typecasting from handle!. it sort of defeats the purpose of an opaque pointer handler IMHO. the better alternative would be to allow the routine to define what struct pointer type it returns directly. |
BrianH 22-Dec-2011 [759x3] | The argv(0) method doesn't work in some circumstances on Windows. R3 has been running into some problems because of that. |
http://issue.cc/r3/1892shows some circumstances that will trigger the problem, so it's a good model for building tests. | |
Andreas wrote this earlier, in response to your question about this: Is there a way to figure out, what directory a command launches from, which will work across platforms? Yes and no. There are platform-specific ways. This gist of it: - Linux: readlink("/proc/self/exe") - OSX: _NSGetExecutablePath - Win32: GetModuleFileNameW (We recently discussed this issue in relation to R3 as well.) | |
Geomol 22-Dec-2011 [762] | The argv method was fast to implement and works in my cases, so I went with that for now. It maybe will need to be replaced by something else. Putting cortex.w (and user.w later) into an install dir like Library/Application Support/world/ could be a way under OSX, and something similar on other platforms. |
Geomol 23-Dec-2011 [763] | New version uploaded with system/options/args and some changes to quiet mode. |
Gregg 23-Dec-2011 [764] | Great to see continuing progress John! |
Geomol 26-Dec-2011 [765] | Thanks, Gregg. Some thoughts... I create World, because I need the tool. So when I have the functionality planned, I've reached one of my goals, because I then have the tool, I need for my own future developments. For World to become a success for others to use also, it needs to be better in crucial ways than the tools, others use today. Therefore I also focus on making World slim (not bloated), stable and bug-free, very well defined, easily integratable and with good performance. There still is work to do in all these areas. |
btiffin 28-Dec-2011 [766] | I have World calling COBOL code. It'll be nice to get a full on 64 bit core though. Much mucking about with 32 bit libraries, compiling COBOL in a VBox etc. Getting close to automating the Dictionary wiki pages as well. Adding to the old topic of openeness. OpenCOBOL is open source, but very few people fork it. Roger is the principal developer, and we wait for his releases ... but we get to see the compiler, build it on our platforms. John, I don't want to see World core open so I can change it, I'd like to see it open so I can read it, build to suit, learn things. So, if it's not asking too much, put the core code up in a read-only repo and ignore the forks while you develop? Lastly; fun and looking forward. |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [767x2] | I have a Win7 (64-bit) install now and did some work yesterday on porting World. I ran into problems with building libffi, which World use. I will look into it. |
Another try to close the topic on openness: So you expect to get man-years of work open-sourced for free? And this in a situation, where I get nothing from doing so? Please, be serious! World is not a hobby-project for me. I have invested a lot of time and money in this. I have my hands full, and the World project do very good progress right now. I see no business benefit from making World open source at this point in time. Case closed. :) | |
Pekr 29-Dec-2011 [769] | Geomol - it is just that you depreciate psychological factors. Ppl, especially with previous experience with RT, are very carefull here. In the end, you might just wonder, why noone is interested in such a model anymore. And in the end, it is just end result, which matters. You either get some community surrounding World, or you might wonder, why while your product is excellent, noone really cares anymore. Or - you might end up finding some nice niche e.g. embedded market, having lots of customers, etc. There is many possibilities, how your decision might influence something. What I really don't understand is one thing - you sound too protective. You have full right to sound that way. But what escapes my mind is - "when I get nothing from doing so?". And what do you get from actually not doing so? Also - do you expect any harm, caused to the business side of your project, by eventually open-sourcing? As for me - I am used to commercial and licensed products. I just wanted to point out, that in the end, your attitude, might be contraproductive. If you keep product developed, ppl might feel safe, but ppl might also be carefull with their contribution to the project, because such kind of REBOL related project already failed big time. Not your falt, that's for sure, but the negative assumption is in the air nonentheless. |
Steeve 29-Dec-2011 [770] | And so he wants support for free. :-) Joke appart, I feel bad because we saw many projects failed because of the same reason. A language implementation itself without real businnes application will get you nothing but some fame. And so he wants support for free. :-) |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [771x4] | I don't ask for your support. I bring World to the awareness of you guys, because you might benefit some a REBOL like language in the current situation with REBOL. I could just have continued keeping my mouth shut and made the tool, I need, without others knowing about it. |
benefit *from* a REBOL like ... | |
And I won't like World to become in a situation, where there are lots of bugs and no progress for years, and it's still close sourced. That won't happen. | |
I feel bad because we saw many projects failed because of the same reason. Don't feel bad! A month ago, you didn't know about World. Now you do, and now you have an extra option. Where is no reason to feel bad. Afaik projects like Boron are open source, and you may put it in the category of "failed projects". So open source doesn't equal success. | |
Steeve 29-Dec-2011 [775] | Boron is not |
PeterWood 29-Dec-2011 [776] | Have you thought of some "escrow" type arrangement to give people the confidence that World will not just disappear at some time in the future? It doesn't have to be a full commercial arrangement but perhaps you could give a copy of the source to somebody that you trust with instructions on what circumstances it would be released (and how it should be released). |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [777] | ok, my bad. I don't know enough about Boron. |
Steeve 29-Dec-2011 [778] | And it's the very reason Boron failed |
PeterWood 29-Dec-2011 [779x2] | Boron is fully open source - it is published on gitorious |
It is published under the LGPL. | |
Steeve 29-Dec-2011 [781] | uh !? |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [782] | :) I take my words "my bad" back. |
PeterWood 29-Dec-2011 [783] | https://gitorious.org/boron/boron |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [784] | Peter, no, I haven't seen a reason for an "escrow" type arrangement yet. World has just been available for 3 weeks or so. And I feel, World isn't quite yet in a situation, where I would build larger projects with it. Close to version 1, maybe around going from alpha to beta release, it could be justified to make arrangements. |
Steeve 29-Dec-2011 [785] | Ok people, look at the red light :) Flashhhhhhh !!!! |
Geomol 29-Dec-2011 [786x2] | I bet, you play sorcerer, when you roleplay! :) |
Pekr, sorry I don't comment on all you say. But look e.g. at a product like WebOS, which was mentioned here in this AltME world not long ago. It was developed to the current state as close source. Just recently HP announced it to go open source. I judge it to be an ok success for the people behind it, even if it was developed as close source. Open source doesn't equal success. And close source also doesn't equal success. But they may be related. | |
Andreas 29-Dec-2011 [788] | Geomol: "man-years of work open-sourced for free? And this in a situation, where I get nothing from doing so?" You could get _a lot_ from doing so. Increased participation in general, with all the positive effects that can encompass. But whether you consider that worth the trade-offs necessary to reap those benefits is obviously your choice. |
GrahamC 29-Dec-2011 [789] | A lot of us would like Rebol and its derivatives to be successful because success brings validation, and more importantly brings new people and development to Rebol. We've all seen the closed source model fail, and specifically we have seen people leave Rebol or refuse to learn Rebol on this account. Orca and Boron are not relevant because there was never a critical mass of people aware of it, and the GPL license put commercial developers here off. Partial open source models like R3 would suggest that this model is also not attractive enough with a lack of investors to keep Carl working on the project. Perhaps you do have some wonderful business plan that is going to work against all odds but the majority of us are not so optimistic. We don't wish to see history keep repeating itself and so we are advising you to change your plan. Think King Canute! |
Kaj 29-Dec-2011 [790x2] | PLEASE STOP CALLING BORON GPL, OR EVEN CLOSED SOURCE!!! |
- Shakes head at all the foolishness spouted here - | |
GrahamC 29-Dec-2011 [792] | If you add functionality to Boron, it becomes a derivative work and subject to GPL restrictions. And stop shouting. lol |
BrianH 29-Dec-2011 [793] | He means that Boron is LGPL, rather than GPL. You still get (an extended large subset of) the restrictions. |
Kaj 30-Dec-2011 [794] | Yes, and the distinction warrants some shouting after half a decade of Boron and ORCA development |
Mchean 30-Dec-2011 [795] | any idea what you're thinking of charging for it? |
Geomol 31-Dec-2011 [796] | I haven't really thought of selling it, so I have no clue. |
Geomol 2-Jan-2012 [797] | I have some free-lance work to do these days, but will continue work on World too. The next thing for World is finishing the memory handling, so contexts are freed completely (problems with functions and blocks within contexts today). I'll check cyclic references too. After that, it's the rest of the datatypes, functions and better networking. |
sqlab 2-Jan-2012 [798x2] | I just checked network. You do not have an error handling for connect |
Where and how do you handle a closed socket during receive (total == 0) | |
Geomol 3-Jan-2012 [800] | In src/host/network.c line 86 and src/host/win32/network.c line 84. I break out of the while loop, if recv returns zero in case of closed socket. |
sqlab 3-Jan-2012 [801] | Yes, I saw that, but what do you do, if total is zero. What do you display or give back. I just get an endless stream of "00000" until crash |
Geomol 3-Jan-2012 [802x2] | Under OS X, I get an empty binary, which is expected behaviour. Under WinXP, the process hangs here. The OS X and Linux version of World use standard BSD networking, the Windows version use MS networking, where an init is needed. You're welcome to suggest changes to the host specific sources. At this stage, I won't use a lot of time on Windows specific sources, as I don't use that platform very much. I consider using cURL for networking, as that could give a lot of features fast. If I find, it adds too much to the overall size of World, it could be cut along the way by moving features from cURL to World sources. |
In fact, it's libcurl, I consider, as cURL is a command line tool. | |
Mchean 5-Jan-2012 [804] | Geomol: is your freelance work using World-lang, just wondering if you find it good enough to do work in yet |
Geomol 6-Jan-2012 [805] | No, mostly COBOL and some REBOL for now. |
Geomol 12-Jan-2012 [806x2] | New release at: https://github.com/Geomol/World |
- Added function to rebol.w: rebol (makes it easier to run REBOL scripts) - Added option: -- - Fixed bug | |
older newer | first last |