World: r4wp
[#Red] Red language group
older newer | first last |
DocKimbel 23-Mar-2013 [6485x2] | Yes, the console support on Mac is still minimal (no history), but at least it works. :-) |
We'll get a much better (at least R2-level) console soon for all platforms. | |
sqlab 23-Mar-2013 [6487] | that's fantastic |
Jerry 23-Mar-2013 [6488] | A colorful console would be great. For example, Black for any-word!, Blue for any-string!, Green for scalar ... |
DocKimbel 23-Mar-2013 [6489] | Contributions are welcome. :-) |
Jerry 23-Mar-2013 [6490] | Beside donation, I would like to contribute to the Red codebase. However, the lack of document stops me. I did read Red/System document again and again, but it's not enough for me to start. I guess I need to read all the red source before I can contribute code? Or is there is another way for us to rush in easily and quickly? |
DocKimbel 23-Mar-2013 [6491x3] | Depends on what you want to what part you want to contribute? |
An internal API documentation would be a good start, but that API is not yet fully stabilized... | |
For now, the best you can do is read all the files in red/runtime/ that will give you a good insight on how to add new features. | |
Kaj 23-Mar-2013 [6494] | Congratulations on the new release. The interpreter is enabling all the use cases we know from REBOL |
DocKimbel 23-Mar-2013 [6495] | Thanks! This one was tough to get out, so many new features to get right and bugs/regressions to fix! |
Pekr 24-Mar-2013 [6496] | I can see some lag of Red vs R3, althought not sure it is a fair measurement. Just tried with repeat i 1000 ["notning"], and while R3 response is instant, Red takes some fair amount of time to complete ... |
DocKimbel 24-Mar-2013 [6497x4] | Have you compiled the console in debug mode? (-d option) |
It returns immediatly here with loop counter up to one million. | |
Close to 3000 hits on red-lang.org since the release, all traffic coming from reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1awkcm/red_programming_language_version_032_released/ If you want to help Red, consider posting and upvoting Red there. ;-) | |
Creating a reddit account is a 10 seconds procedure and email is optional. | |
Pekr 24-Mar-2013 [6501] | Doc, it was for Try Rebol site, not my own one attempts to test ... |
Gregg 24-Mar-2013 [6502] | REPEAT is instant here in the console I just compiled. Joined Trello. Joined Reddit. I must care. :-) |
Kaj 24-Mar-2013 [6503] | Petr, you're looking at network delay |
DocKimbel 24-Mar-2013 [6504x2] | Close to 5000 hits on red-lang.org now. |
Even if Red is not yet ready for prime time, it is good to have some devs having at least heard about it. When we'll launch Red for real, that will greatly help it spread around. | |
Gregg 24-Mar-2013 [6506] | Indeed. That's great Doc. |
DocKimbel 24-Mar-2013 [6507x3] | New SYSTEM function added (meant to mimick the SYSTEM object until we have object support). red>> system/version == "0.3.2, 25-Mar-2013/2:03:45+1:00" red>> system/platform == Windows red>> length? system/words == 290 So now, who wants to implement WHAT function? ;-) |
BTW, we need to add doc-strings to all functions in %boot.red, I like the Rebol short but meaningful strings, but I have a few questions first: 1) Could we borrow them from R3? 2) Does that fall under Apache license too (I guess so, but just checking)? 3) In such case, where and how do we to put proper credits? | |
BTW, now SYSTEM/PLATFORM replaces previous PLATFORM? function. | |
Kaj 24-Mar-2013 [6510] | R3 doc strings were released as part of the source, so they are under Apache. They would taint Red to fall under the Apache licence, too, making it more restricted than BSL and incompatible with GPL |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6511] | Doc: is it intentional? red>> repeat i 10 [ ] == 10 red>> i == 10 |
Rebolek 25-Mar-2013 [6512] | AFAIK it is and I really don't like it. |
Henrik 25-Mar-2013 [6513] | Can this decision be explained, please? |
DocKimbel 25-Mar-2013 [6514x2] | It is intentional and has several purposes: a) avoiding the creation of an hidden context for each iterator instance and especially the costly deep BINDing of argument block on each call. b) making the iterator word available outside of the loop, can be useful when early breaking from loop, avoiding the passing of the counter through a BREAK/RETURN. It can also be used to check if the loop counter has reached its limit or not. c) it is IMHO counter-intuitive for users, after a few years you get used to it, but it is a wall that every new user will hit more than once. I think that the extra step of defining it as local word is really not a big deal in comparison. Also, FUNCTION constructor could be enhanced to take care of that for you. |
I think that my trade-off for Red is "better", but we can discuss it if I have missed something. | |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6516x4] | How the outer REPEAT remembers the value i? red>> repeat i 3 [print i repeat i 2 [print [tab i]]] 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 |
And the last value is 2, not 3. red>> i == 2 | |
It is a bit confusing. | |
Even the outer REPEAT doesn't return its last value in this case: red>> i: repeat i 3 [print i repeat i 2 [print [tab i]] i] red>> i == 2 But normally it does: red>> i: repeat a 5 [4] == 4 | |
Rebolek 25-Mar-2013 [6520] | I don't want iterator word available outside of loop, this is really bad idea. |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6521] | I *feel* same way, I usually use i, j, k, t, s as /local words to functions, and I don't worry to mess them with iterator words inside function. But we should explain why or how it is a bad idea to Doc (if it really is) |
Henrik 25-Mar-2013 [6522] | What does this do (I don't have access to Red here): repeat i i: 3 [print i] |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6523] | red>> repeat i i: 3 [print i] 1 2 3 red>> i == 3 |
Henrik 25-Mar-2013 [6524x3] | hmm... yes, I guess that makes sense. |
but importantly, not necessariy for the same reason as in REBOL. | |
I guess we need consistency. Do any other loop functions in Red behave this way? | |
DocKimbel 25-Mar-2013 [6527x3] | All behave the same way. |
Bad idea is not an argument. You should look at it with a fresh view, if we got used to it after several years, it doesn't mean that it was a good design choice in the first place. | |
How the outer REPEAT remembers the value i? Iterator word value is stored on stack, recursively. | |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6530] | Doc: What do you think about the examples above? About return value. |
DocKimbel 25-Mar-2013 [6531] | Anyway, you shouldn't use the same word for nested loops, that is just confusing and will lead to errors. |
Endo 25-Mar-2013 [6532] | But if there is no extra binding, how does this work as expected? red>> repeat i 3 [print i repeat i 2 [print [tab i]]] |
DocKimbel 25-Mar-2013 [6533x2] | Return value: it looks logical to me, REPEAT returns the last value from body block. In your example, the last value in the last iteration is 2 (because `i` is set to 2 by the inner REPEAT). Same rule as for your second code example. |
how does this work as expected? I just answered that above: "Iterator word value is stored on stack, recursively." | |
older newer | first last |