World: r4wp

Brian: that last shortest path might be the first thing to try.

Agreed. And it will be easier to keep an API clone updated for future 
SQLite changes, so we can get the benefits of future improvements 
to the storage engines.

SQLite already went through the trouble of extracing and abstracting 
their storage engines, so it's best to reuse their work :)

We certainly have better ways to spend your time than debugging SQLite 
internals, so keeping the same SQLite codebase subset seems the right 
thing to do.

Well, what I would like to see is the ability to have one file per 
table, without artificial limits like having to attach databases, 
to some artificial number of 9, or what was the limit. Second - SQLite 
4 to have encryption storage option ....

Also some record level locking would be nice to have ...

If you want one file per table, pick another engine. For the rest 
of that stuff SQLite is OK.

Yes, it would really help to more easily backup at the file level 
- not just one monstrous file each time, but certain tables ...

there is no other option to SQLite, other embedded databases are 
either not free, or don't use SQL syntax (e.g. mySQL)

With the SQLite 4 storage engines you don't necessarily even need 
tables at all - it's a key-value store. Even SQLite recreates the 
table metaphor on top.

big change in their paradigm. And the one, which fits imo REBOL. 
IIRC Carl always wanted some stronger storage option to load/save 
blocks. IIRC Rebin was needed? He once was considering adding SQLite, 
but found it too big. IMO it would be good if we used SQLite for 
Red, to standardise. I doubt we can find more efficient, powerfull, 
and cross-platform tool with the right licence? Of course more efficient 
solution might be done by pure Red facitilities, but unless we need 
really extra efficient solution, why to reinvent the wheel?

The big advantage of SQLite over other similar engines is that it's 
bundled already in the main mobile platforms (Android and iOS).

MySQL doesn't use SQL syntax?

Kaj - last I checked it was long time ago. It did not use SQL syntax, 
and was not even free IIRC. But I don't follow mySQL for many years 
now ...

Doc - right - that is also important, that the engine is being present 
on such platforms ...

It was always a GPL SQL database, but people complained it didn't 
support as much as, say, Oracle and PostgreSQL

Well, if using an unmodified engine that is already installed is 
the goal, SQLite 4 is out.

Just give it time

Hi guys - I am trying out Red/System and all seems very good until 
I try out Kaj's fibonacci and mandelbrot functions. I downloaded 
the c-library -sorted the paths and locations and tested the library 
on simple things and all compiles well. When I try to compile fib 
and mandel I get the following compilation error:

>> do/args %rsc.r "%tests/mine/fibonacci.reds"
Script: "Red/System compiler wrapper" (none)

-= Red/System Compiler =-
Compiling tests/mine/fibonacci.reds ...
Script: "Red/System IA-32 code emitter" (none)
*** Compilation Error: alias name already defined as: [str
uct! [
        item [c-string!]
    ]]
*** in file: %runtime/common.reds
*** at line: 61
*** near: [
    str-array!: alias struct! [
        item [c-string!]
    ]
    typed-value!: alias struct! [
        type [integer!]
        value [integer!]
        _padding [integer!]
    ]
]

Any suggestions as to what I am doing wrong?

Most probably the binding was not tested for quite some time, and 
Red + Red/System evolves, so there might be some regression there. 
Better wait for experts, though ...

Ken: thanks for giving it a try. We might have left these two scripts 
lagging behind. Anyway, you'll have that fixed during the day (the 
good side of having a fast pace). ;-)

Go Doc, Go! :-)

Thanks guys, for the speedy replies

Doc, I think the work you are doing is superb and Red is a very exciting 
project - thankyou!

I test the bindings and examples regularly, so they should work. 
I'll check, but which version of Red/System are you using?

I am using the version downloaded from Github a couple of days ago 
"v0.2.6-39-gfc5c4a3"

Both the Fibonacci and Mandelbrot examples work with the current 
dyn-lib-emitter branch of Red/System, and I tested them for the 0.2.6 
and 0.2.5 releases, so they should work there, too

Did you install the extra Red-common Fossil repository that the C 
library binding now needs? (See the Announce group here)

Ok - I downloaded the examples by copy and paste from the examples 
in the Files section of the C Library Binding for Red - is this the 
correct way to access the examples as well as the c-library or is 
there another way?

I am running on Windows 8 64 bit by the way

Currently, the Red-common repository goes into a common/ subdirectory 
but the Red-C-library repository goes into a Red-C-library/ subdirectory

It's much easier to download a repository as a Zip package or tarball. 
Go to a particular version or check-in and use the download links 
there

It's even better to check out the repositories with Fossil, so you 
can keep them up to date easily:

http://rebol.esperconsultancy.nl/documentation/how-to-use-Fossil.html

Ok - I am confused - are we talking about getting Red/System now, 
or your c-library bindings and examples? I downloaded Red/System 
from Github, the zipped version using the supplied button. Then when 
I had all that working I went to the Red blog site - contributions 
- c library binding - and downloaded your c-library etc from there 
using copy and paste

No, my bindings

I will have a look into using Fossil and try again - it may be that 
the examples I have obtained are out of sync with the examples obtained 
through fossil - once I have figured it out I will try again and 
let you know my results -thanks for your help

There is little opportunity for being out of sync, as I tested them 
all the time

Most likely, you have put files in different places then they're 
supposed to be, and the paths are now wrong

Possibly, but I did go through all the #includes and made sure the 
c-library and common.reds was accessible and working, but like I 
said, I will try using Fossil and see what happens that way

More information on handling the repositories for one binding is 
here:

http://rebol.esperconsultancy.nl/extensions/0MQ/

Thanks Kaj

You're welcome

I'm repeating myself, but it looks I'm not alone who find it confusing 
to work with 2 repos. As we are really working with just a few kB, 
it would be really better to have it in one place = GitHub and not 
to merge libs with Fosill. But anyway, I appricaiate your contributions 
Kaj, so use whatever you like.

The situation at the moment certainly can be confusing, but the solution 
lies not in moving everything to a central repository.


The real solution is to improve Red(/System)'s mechanisms for locating 
and including other scripts ("libraries"). A simple "search path" 
would already go a long way, and will probably be added soon.

(Please note that I'm deliberately using rather vague terms, as I 
only want to point at where the solution lies, but not suggest a 
concrete design of that solution, at the moment.)

it would be nice to formalise, e.g. to have /bindings subdir, where 
partricular systems would be represented by subdirs, etc.