World: r4wp

Doc, lets suppose I am a customer:

I need a veicle with 4 wheels and and engine.

You can make it however you want but I need 4 wheel and and engine.

If the result is the same why care abut the building process ?

-- END OF MY ARGUMENTATION --

Giuseppe - in few months, Red will gain 80% of Core functionality, 
and even surpass it in some areas. Just let it live ...

my vote is already a 100% for Red :)

I would like DocKimbel to stick with his own idea, not to be affected 
by the Open-source of R3.

but implementation is totally different

 - That's what I meant by "isn't really set yet". They will likely 
 be different because of the different language semantic models, but 
 they might be more alike than you think once both are set.

Yes but I will have 4 wheel and an engine. The same of  REBOL3. It 
is the result which counts.

However I understand the pleasure of reimplementing everything in 
my own way.

Yes but do you need a family car or a Formula1 car? Or a truck?

Giuseppe - let's really be fair to Doc here! You are asking him to 
give-up on what was really a strong decision for him, which even 
has influenced his life. Doc moved from France to Montenegro, in 
order to work on Red. And all that would not be necessary, if Carl 
would not let us in the water. So really - just let Doc alone for 
few moments, to think about all new consequences ...

ditto.

BrianH: I think Doc's answer was to Giuseppe claiming that Red is 
just a REBOl clone ...

Arnold. We are talking about minor differences like a car with 2 
doors instead of 4 and electric glasses in place of manual ones. 
The comparison doesn't suit here. If BOTH languages are "Very Close" 
(read above), which are the advantages ?

Giuseppe: they might seem similar on the surface, but I can garantee 
you that you'll see and feel the difference when Red will be mature 
enough.

Giuseppe: you seem to not understand the difference between a interpreter 
and a compiler.

Yes I understand.

But I want to make the DEVIL ADVOCATE.

When RED will be mature. In which scenario should a developer choose 
it instead of REBOL3 ?

(And let me state again: I apreciate your commitment)

It is a question that must be answered. It is the core of your project, 
it is the motivation for your "customers".

GiuseppeC: Red/System is a language to build other languages using 
a similar syntax as REBOL, one of which is Red. R3 is based on C. 
There is no way for R3 to tap directly inline into C's performance, 
while Red will be able to. I think this is quite a feat that might 
make Red much more flexible than R3. You also get encapping right 
out of the box with the current compiler. I can't come up with an 
appropriate car analogy.

Henrik, PERFORMANCE. It is the first difference. Now the car can 
run faster.
Any other differences ?

Red/System also offers a nicely compact and clean toolchain, which 
R3 doesn't even focus on. As far as I know, not many people like 
the current C toolchains.

I am talking about RED and not RED/System.

Just to make it clear.

That means that we have total 100% control over how and where Red 
can build. We don't depend on the quality of the compiler for a platform.

I can see and huge difference between C and RED/System which give 
to the latter a great appeal to the developers.

I don't think you can talk Red without talking Red/System, because 
in the long run, you may be happy to have Red/System available instead 
of resorting to C for performance parts.

Henrik, yeas, I want RED/system, I feel this needing. It is easy, 
human compatible, it is nice. It makes the difference.

Ok, I am leaving, I have to go away.

Henrik speaks wise words. For the past decade, we've been occupied 
with maintaining the GNU C/C++ toolchain in Syllable. If it hadn't 
been so problematic, we could have spent that time developing the 
operating system itself, and the project might have been in a much 
better position now

To everyone: my questions are not meant to create problems. I work 
every day with customers and they always ask me "which is the difference 
between you and this other product/service".

So the difference between Red and R3 is between a car that takes 
you there, and a car that breaks down before reaching your destination

It's a fair question, but the answer depends on insight

I find myself less and less interested in REBOL, even open sourced

Well Guiseppe, you may have to think of a second hand car ;) 

You can drive with it, it can be the car you wanted but some details 
as its color and chairheating can differ from what you had in mind. 
It is up to you to buy it anyway. By buying second hand you can have 
a more powerful engine than buying a new car.

Remember that the REBOLution was proclaimed to create the next generation 
operating system. However, REBOL falls seriously short there, not 
having delivered an operating system and not running well on top 
of any other operating system

Red does solve the problems that need to be solved there

For what I have seen, Kaj, I can second that. I use REBOL to learn 
Red ;)

And the liberation from the C tool CHAIN Viva la Liberation!

:-)

It may be time to consider REBOL an idea, a good one and one that 
now needs to have its true wings in the form of Red.

it would be also possible to rewrite R3 in Red/System, but then R3 
would be similar to Red itself?

Doc tells me an interpreter would be simple to write in Red, so even 
there no need for R3

Does R3 need a console? It would be the interpreter made using Red.

you beat me Kaj!

Kaj - not sure it will be a console, but something like that, just 
not an interpreter, but more a JIT compiler?

Red will be a JIT compiler, but you could still write an interpreter 
on top of it. Might even be useful, for example for platforms that 
block JIT compilation