World: r4wp
[#Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
Nicolas 27-Oct-2012 [3031] | I get virus alerts all the time from red. I just turn it off. The only thing that ever got as many hits as red was rainbowforth which was another very minimalistic program. AV programs seem prejudiced against small executables :( |
DocKimbel 27-Oct-2012 [3032x3] | I've sent a few info requests to various AV vendors, I hope to get some clues about what's triggering their heuristics. |
I will release v0.3.0 in a couple of hours, if you want to do some tests to track regressions, that would help. | |
For example, testing Kaj's bindings on non-Windows platforms would help. | |
Kaj 27-Oct-2012 [3035x2] | Consolas font: probably not, I'll ask |
Shouldn't FPU initialisation be included automatically when Red/System is configured to use the C library? I have at least three bindings that need it | |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3037x2] | What makes you think it is not included? |
I've sent an email to Freddy already asking a few more questions about his issues. | |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3039] | I've dropped my C library binding from several examples that use large libraries on top of GTK. I had my FPU initialisation in the C library binding and now the crashes on float exceptions are back |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3040] | You should add C-specific FPU initialisation to the bindings that produces float exceptions. C relies on FPU flags (masked exceptions) that are different from what Red/System uses. Doing so will shutdown some Red/System runtime error traps (like division by zero), but allow C-based libraries that access the FPU to work normally. |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3041] | Ah, forgot that they conflict |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3042x2] | Red alpha release: http://www.red-lang.org/2012/10/red-alpha-release.html |
I'm glad this one is out...finally back to coding now! :-) | |
Arnold 28-Oct-2012 [3044] | Congratulations! Looks great, sure gonna play around with this release! |
Henrik 28-Oct-2012 [3045] | Wonderful. |
Jerry 28-Oct-2012 [3046] | Great News! |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3047] | Thanks! I have added a mention about missing Chinese font on some of the screenshots, just in case someone thinks it's a bug. |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3048x3] | Congratulations on this heavy milestone! |
I've moved the SQLite developing branch to trunk. Needs the new Red/System release | |
Is there currently a difference between MSDOS and Windows targets? | |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3051] | Yes, MSDOS uses the 'console sub-system, while Windows target uses the 'GUI sub-system. |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3052] | OK, but what's the concrete difference in generated code? |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3053x2] | So far, it doesn't make a big difference in practice. |
The difference lies in the PE header, the sub-system required to run the app needs to be set to either 'console or 'GUI. | |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3055] | OK, thanks. I'll split the test builds, then |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3056x3] | But Windows seems to be quite permissive in recent versions, so a GUI app can also be started from DOS console. |
Yes, it would be cleaner for the day when we will have real GUI apps in Red, in addition to console-only ones. | |
(at least for the Windows platform) | |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3059] | I suppose GTK and SDL officially need GUI |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3060] | Yes, it would be cleaner/safer to compile them using 'Windows target rather than MSDOS, but I'm not sure you what would happen to the text sent to stdout and stderr then... |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3061] | Good point. I'll add instead of move them, then |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3062] | Calling it something like Windows-Console rather than MSDOS might be better, since the real MSDOS (or rather clones of it) is still a valid target for embedded development. The Windows console environment hasn't been MSDOS since the '90s. |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3063] | Brian: I'm aware of that. The probabilty of someone porting Red to old MSDOS (no Unicode, no multitasking, no native TCP/IP) is very close to zero. If someone does it anyway, we'll adjust our targets ID accordingly. In the meantime, I prefer typing "-t MSDOS" rather than "-t Windows-Console" on command-line. Also, it's easier to remember for everyone, after all it's just an ID, nothing else. If you are thinking about FreeDOS, which is probably a more likely target than real old MSDOS, I guess we won't have any name collision then. ;-) |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3064x3] | Call it DOS. But the MSDOS target name still annoys me. I don't want a legitimate, common target build to bring back such bad memories :( |
Actually, not all of the memories were bad. In recent years I was thinking of making sure R3 would run on a set of libraries that enables Windows apps on DOS, but at the moment I'm having trouble finding the link/name of those libraries. | |
Ah, here it is, the HX DOS extender: http://www.japheth.de/HX.html | |
Pekr 28-Oct-2012 [3067] | what about calling it CMD (as is the command, cmd.exe, which you have to issue to open that black old console), or CON, as a "console"? |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3068x2] | I've hesitated between DOS and MSDOS in the beginning, and I've chosen the later one, because it is more meaningful for everyone, especially those that do not use Windows often (or never use it). As I've said, if someone ever ports Red to old MSDOS, we'll deal with the name conflict then. |
Pekr: Red is not a Windows-only product. ;-) | |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3070] | I meant call the real DOS target DOS. No Windows-based target should have DOS or MSDOS in its name :( |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3071] | Brian: as I've explained to Kaj earlier, Windows does make a difference between apps built with GUI or built for console- only. If it wasn't the case, we would only have the "Windows" target. |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3072] | I have no problem with the existence of the target, and will likely use it; I just don't like the name. |
PeterWood 28-Oct-2012 [3073] | Congratulations on the release of Red Alpha. |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3074] | Another OS for running Windows console binaries (and possibly more): http://www.jbox.dk/sanos/ |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3075] | I also thought about "WinCon" at the beginning (and "WinGUI" instead of "Windows"), but quickly dropped it because it would not be easy to remember, and inconsistent with the way other targets are named. See the targets list at the bottom of this page: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3076] | Calling it DOS would annoy me, as I had that on Atari 8-bit :-) |
Pekr 28-Oct-2012 [3077] | well, let's not loose much time upon what just annoys us re naming convention of not so important language parameter ... :-) |
BrianH 28-Oct-2012 [3078] | I don't want *that* target called DOS, I want it called something without "DOS" in the name, since it's not for DOS (MS or not). |
Kaj 28-Oct-2012 [3079] | http://bikeshed.org |
DocKimbel 28-Oct-2012 [3080] | Brian: you don't have to like it, on Windows, it's the default target, so you'll never have to type it as long as you're not cross-compiling from another OS. ;-) |
older newer | first last |