World: r3wp

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.

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.

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. :)

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.

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. :-)

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.

Boron is not

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).

ok, my bad. I don't know enough about Boron.

And it's the very reason Boron  failed

Boron is fully open source - it is published on gitorious

It is published under the LGPL.

uh !?

:) I take my words "my bad" back.

https://gitorious.org/boron/boron

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.

Ok  people, look at the red light :)
Flashhhhhhh !!!!

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.

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.

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!

PLEASE STOP CALLING BORON GPL, OR EVEN CLOSED SOURCE!!!

- Shakes head at all the foolishness spouted here -

If you add functionality to Boron, it becomes a derivative work and 
subject to GPL restrictions.  And stop shouting. lol

He means that Boron is LGPL, rather than GPL. You still get (an extended 
large subset of) the restrictions.

Yes, and the distinction warrants some shouting after half a decade 
of Boron and ORCA development

any idea what you're thinking of charging for it?

I haven't really thought of selling it, so I have no clue.

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.

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)

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.

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

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.

Geomol: is your freelance work using World-lang, just wondering if 
you find it good enough to do work in yet

No, mostly COBOL and some REBOL for now.

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

Any news here? Wondering why the momentum is mostly gone für world.

maybe the licensing talk kind of lowered enthusiasm

Maybe Geomol has found his own cave ?

:))

Probably there comes free cave with every closed-source language.

The last release was only a couple weeks ago.

Gregg - "only a couple weeks ago"? That pretty much sucks. Geomol 
HAS TO relalise, that noone is really intereted in old school models, 
or he is on his own ....