World: r3wp

I love the REBOL rarity lexical scanning.  Drove me nuts at first, 
it looked reverse

polish, as an ex-forther, that was a hard one to get round.  But 
now...no going back :)

Which can make debugging a bit difficult if one it is not disciplined 
enough.

jaime: yes, when these occur in my head I sometimes add parens... 
just to make it easier to update later on.

Gabriele, "brainfuck is turing complete, but don't tell me it's the 
same as scheme".  Well it depends on what you mean by sameness. I 
am using Turing Complete as the base of the definition. Because if 
the language is Turing Complete you can construct an emulator of 
any other language. After all that is needed is bits, memory and 
register to carry out any computation. It maybe hard to make a Rebol 
interpreter in brainfuck but it is certainly possible.

but you'd need about IQ 5000 to get it done...which probably means 
only an alien could get it done  ;-)

Nah. You make the compiler of C to brainfuck. Take Orca's C source 
compile to brainfuck and you are done.

hehe

functional compilation ;-)

Talk about a name that'd drive corporate away...bf has to up there.

brian: do you know what brain fuck is?

I've read up on it a little.  More just to see what the name was 
about.  :)

hehe so you know its name is well deserved  ;-)

*The Next Big Language* http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html

brainfuck is consider a pathological PL. There are a bunch of them. 
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/goodmath/programming/pathological_programming/

Whitespace.

Jaime, again, that was a REBOL 1.0 to Scheme compiler, and it was 
not even complete!!! REBOL 1.0 was sooo limited compared to REBOL 
2.0 that it's even hard to call it REBOL. Just consider that BIND 
took one argument. (Which implies that it had the notion of scope!) 
It had no ports...

Carl told us some horror stories about the source code of REBOL 1.0... 
let's not get into that.

Again, if you think it's not impossible, just write a translator 
to any high-level language that is compiled. If the target language 
is high level enough, this should be a few lines of code, according 
to your theory.

brainfuck... so, if it's the same as Scheme, why are you using Scheme 
instead of brainfuck? See, there is some difference, as there is 
some difference between Scheme and C. I'm interested in precisely 
that difference, so if you rule it out in your definitions then we 
have nothing to discuss about.

Be one with the Borg!!!

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/15/business/msft.php

Experts say Microsoft's patent quest won't go far
ZDNet - 4 hours ago

By Stephen Shankland, CNET News.com. Microsoft's accusation that 
the open-source software industry has infringed Microsoft says open-source 
software violates 235 patents

Let's try that again.. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/15/business/msft.php

...yes... for example "mouse click"... it's really crazy... should 
I pay if I use "button"?

I wonder what would happen, if someone registered 1 and 0 :-)

I can see Microsoft attempting to tie the smaller companies up in 
court and then Microsoft bail them our of the their financial troubles 
by means of majority investment.

....vice president of intellectual property.... AAAAAAAARGH

lunatics. somebody put them behind the bars.

235 patents -- actually that's a claimed 235 violations: they might 
all be of the same patent.

Until MS names the patents and the infringing applications no one 
will know.


But MS probably don't know either -- Ballmer was quoting from a (non 
MS) report that said a survey of (some) open source code showed *no* 
(as in zero) violattions of any patent that had been tested in Court, 
and a possible 235 violations of _untested_ patents.

well, if they are going for it, who will they sue? and do they expect 
to make more than a few bucks on it?

they might even make more money, by persuading Linus Thorvalds to 
buy a copy of Vista Ultimate :-)

Statistically, I find it close to impossible to believe that no open 
source infringes on MS, to begin with.

Then there are patents from IBM, Oracle, etc. 


One has to either decide they are for patents or against them.  Once 
you have worked that out (sort of religion), then you can make all 
your other statements.

But MS is not the issue here.

LOL - Sometimes I see something that really takes me aback.  See 
Gabriele post the words "brainfuck" was one of those moments.  Then 
I realized it was a programming language.  : - )

:)

I am waiting for the intorudction of hosuehold-patents. that would 
mean a lot infirngers which cant defend^^

What is a house-hold patent?

Special unique clever ways of cooking, feeding childs and so on.

You never know if someone patented it..

And no money to challenge a claim

One patent I'd like to see some "spirit of common good" applied to 
is turning off the

mouse pointer when it approaches an active text cursor.  Apple wanted 
to charge

MS large for it (iirc).  So we all get to flick the mouse around 
every time we type in a

field.  It is a nice feature of the Mac...but come on...RSI and carpal 
tunnel for what?
A nah-nah-nah-nah-na between two rivals.

Maybe they can cirvcumvent it? DOnt hide, use alpha. But if people 
choose full alpha in the control-panel - well, they are doomed^^

I'm recommenting on Chat (not web)

Quad Core Chips...

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/05/14/tech-amdphenom-20070514.html

When do we get street level quantum computers?

Volker; Can Microsoft handle alpha?  giggle.  They caused me no end 
of grief with

transparency layers and .png files with IE.  I think it might seem 
a little beyond them.

I mean, maybe someone has the patent and they didn't want to infringe. 
 I'm trying

not to bad mouth anymore, man, it is working out to be harder than 
I first envisioned.


In tune with that, check out http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513
Just to play fair.  Personally I love the Mac ads.

To be fair, yes, ads are subliminal, but that virus-thingy? They 
need two guys, one is Axtivex, the other Unix. ActiveX: "look at 
that cool link, my user will love if i execute it!" - Unix:  "DO 
you think? Shouldnt we ask the user first?" - ActiveX: "*sigh*, unix 
is so booring!". Mor eon the spot then that user-counting IMHO^^

Nany-style Person comes, "i am a virus-checker", and tries to carry 
ActiveX away. hard job^^

Have you had a chance to play in Vista yet?  Allow?...Is that you?...I've 
let someone

access the internet...  Very informative "pop-ups".  There I go trash 
talkin' again.  It is

funny, actually.  Maybe that's the point, to put some humour back 
in personal computing.

Gabriele, Shereman is not Rebol 1.0 it was writting after Joe left 
RT. It is a different language than rebol and it is no R1.0.

I am not arguing about the level of difficulty  that is involved 
on making a high level language or interpreter. You raise that point. 
I only claim that your dismisal of Scheme capabilities is baseless.

I don't use brainfuck, because I prefer Scheme. But I am not a religious 
follower that believes that my doctrine is the best and only one 
with certain capabilities. Your dismissal of Scheme sound like that 
rethoric.