World: r4wp

I'd say with the latest news, there's a future for R3 again

his blog - janko-in-a-jar seems offline
any ideas if he's shifted to some other domain?

YES! the news is incredible

Dunno

Open Source R3! Thank you Carl!!

hoping that r2 will also be open sourced though

I don't think so. However, I'll run as much as possible on Red

i havent started using red yet...
itching to

r2 probably relies on some third party closed source, more than r3.

perhaps...but would be good to see r2 open

at least for bug fixing, it would be nice, but with the legal issues 
that r3 must go through to become open source, I imagine it would 
be more difficult for r2.

well - am super excited that r3 is in what looks like the final stages 
of being open sourced
i'm not a licensing guru, but LGPL and MIT looks good to me
or Apache

or a custom REBOL license - based on Carl's latest blog post

Had to make a Red bug report, but I'm looking into your ventilator 
now

thanks Kaj!

Which 0MQ version are you using?

2.1.4

That's good, I'm getting some strange results with 3.2

strange as in?

Request/reply is not printing the message content

works perfectly with 2.1.4

havent been looking at changes to zmq for a while now

but all of my python stuff works just fine with 3.2

AND i have pub-sub working between r2 and python

2.1.4 on r2, 3.2 on python

They made some awkward changes in the 3 series that I haven't reviewed 
yet

I'll probably switch to Crossroads I/O

hmmm - dont know that one
checking it out now...

Fork by the original developers

SUjoy, send me a reminder next week. I'm very busy the next few days, 
but have ported many of the 0mq guide examples. Mine use Andreas's 
binding, but it might still help.

Will do Greg...I saw on the zmq list that you were doing the peering 
example as well...super stuff

Found the underlying problem: I had the push/pull definitions the 
wrong way around

Fixed it and added the complete ventilator example:

http://rebol.esperconsultancy.nl/REBOL-2-ZeroMQ-binding

:)
i should have been able to pick that out

thanks kaj...downloading now

I only realised at the end, when no other possibility remained :-)

working with zmq3.2? i'm wondering if i should download and move 
up to 3.2
...though crossroads i/o looks very good

Better wait, I haven't adapted to 3.2 yet

ok. thanks again Kaj

I haven't followed crossroads too much. Is their i/o very different?

very similar from what little i've seen
they even have a libzmq compatability layer built in

only supports zmq 2.1.1 though

and will be deprecated

That makes sense. Forks happen.

I see that some folks use 'copy' on top-level bindings (i.e., foo: 
copy [], bar: copy "", bas: copy #{}). Is this simply stylistic (for 
consistency with initialisation inside of blocks) or am I overlooking 
a potential pitfall?

The pitfall is the copy trap.

and the copy trap may occur anywhere.

http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Forgoing_faux_pas#The_COPY_Trap

sure, but that example is inside a block