World: r3wp

Anyone is free to do anything. What I don't like is early split. 
I think that R3 without View has little sense. Who thinks that Core 
will make it, is imo mistaken. What would be browser plugin good 
for, if it would be Core only - there is no point in making such 
a plugin. And what GUI will we get? Multimegabyte SDL linked one? 
No VID?

no one said there will be no VID.

OK then ... because VID like methodology of GUI creation is the correct 
answer to go simple GUIs. Remember that JavaFX has stolen some ideas 
from View - just look at the GUI syntax - so close ...

I use REBOL to solve problems, please clients and get work done. 
 I also want to start doing some gaming and I really want to use 
OGL and REBOL so it can be cross platform and very fast with the 
minimal fuss.

but again, this pixel perfect idea isn't what its all hyped up to 
be.

even current VID can't deliver on that since it can't guarantee the 
same fonts on all OSes.

and many clients DONT want custom guis... they want OS look and features 
which are OS native, like D&D, spotlight menu integration on OSX, 
system tray on windows, etc etc.

I prefer one well supported engine instead of 10 less supported. 
Everybody is free to do anything. What I don't like is, that sometimes 
new stuff distracts the crowd and splits the effort. In the same 
way I think that VID Ext Kit, in current days, is contraproductive 
product, but this is just my opinion.

If you do OS native look, you kill REBOL ....

We have to have our own face. The custom GUI is not the problem. 
The problem always was in its behavioral area - we need system compatible 
behaviour and deployment.

you forget that many of us actually use REBOL to feed our families 
 ;-)


R3 won't allow that for me until at least 6 months... and that's 
if the extension get extended enough.  otherwise, I have *Absolutely* 
no incentive to move to R3 right now.

I don't understand your point

why would using OS integration kill REBOL... its the first complaint 
I have EVERY time I deliver an application to a client...  its not 
integrated into the OS.

I am not against integration. I am against making View using native 
OS widgets ...

for me, the GUI dialect should be completely separate from its implementation. 
 so that one can reuse the dialect in another engine he needs.

pekr... clients pay for applications... who cares what we want... 
they are the one ultimately driving what we need REBOL for.

Maxim - I might not care. This is just one measure, what client want. 
I provided clients with many solutions, from DOS apps via Windows 
native apps, some web apps, and VID/RebGUI small apps. They don't 
care.

If you say, that Carl should implement in R3 what clients want, then 
we as well might end-up with totally different R3 than we have :-)

as I said - you are free to do anything. What I want though, is at 
least one standard distro, even if being worse then external stuff. 
I don't want REBOL equivalent of KDE vs Gnome situation ...

... or MorphOS vs AmigaOS :-)

Python does very well and it has no native GUI.

I'm saying that I need to be able to get shit done.  :-)


as much as I like the community and would love to be paid to work 
on improving R3 and making the world a better place, REBOL is and 
will always be a tool.  my needs are not the same than yours, or 
Graham's or Carl's.

View/VID is not rebol.

If R3 has VID3 working, I'll probably use it for some projects... 
but when GLass will start to work (using OpenGL) then I'll probably 
never need VID anymore.  simply cause it'll do 5000 frames a second 
for my interfaces, including very advanced looks and next gen functionality 
like run-time interface manipulation by end-users.

graham, correct.

I hope there is no underlying assumption that a gui for R3 will make 
it hugely successful.

IMHO Extensions will allow it to be much more successfull than any 
GUI we add to R3.

Just let Henrik build a GUI for both R2 and R3 ...

and let Carl concentrate on finishing R3/core.

People forget that I chose REBOL a decade ago because it was the 
exact same design I had built as the language for the OS I have envisioned 
15 years ago.  


Now just about everything is in place for me to bring this vision 
to reality... finally.  (and not all of this is directly related 
to REBOL).

funny thing is that my project was initially called magma and rebol's 
original codename was lava and I wasn't aware of rebol until a few 
years into my design.  :-)

CGI mode runs on OS X. I ran the simple date & time test. I wouldn't 
say it works yet as the CGI environment variables (such as remote 
addr) don't seem to have been added yet.

They are passed to the process by the web server, if at all. Did 
you try GET-ENV ?

Not yet.

system/options/cgi isn't likely to be added to R3 - use GET-ENV instead.

get-env works okay for REMOTE_ADDR, thanks.

It must be just Windows that doesn't work. Or maybe just IIS - Apache 
might work on Windows.

Graham - how can you think that language itself, without any kind 
of killer app or niche area could be succesfull? If anything, View/VID 
is good attraction for MANY new potential newcomers. They will be 
hardly attracted by REBOL itself, mainly due its syntax difference 
to "more traditional" languages ...

Maxim: apart from LAVA, there was plan for MagmaOS, and it was official 
name chosen by Carl :-) Later on, Wildman name appeared ...

Name me any candidates for a killer app on vid now.

I can do se very easily, but I will revert - name me any candidate, 
which will attract millions, without the View/VID. Cheyenne? CureCode? 
Those are cool in itself, but how they will attract any new ppl to 
REBOL specifically?

I think they can because they can be almost zero setup ( well once 
doc fixes curecode's installation )

and vid ??

our killer app lays initially in plugin, and showing world few presentation, 
easy of gui creation, and some real service wrapping, doing a tour 
comparind sources. Wrap OSnews.com, when you post article there. 
Wrap gmail, or later on their Wave, and show the code difference, 
compare sizes, compare speed. And at the end of presentation do a 
bundle - show stand-alone app called gmail, not needing browser ...

I remember how we once tried to do similar stuff, just for the excercise 
purposes, wrapping SlashDot. There were 2-3 versions of GUI wrappers 
available.

I can show you my HTC mobile Youtube wrapper. An end up, much better 
organisation of space on cell phone, than going to browser.

And you constantly forget one thing - ppl are caught by eye candy, 
you can't fight it. Do the design right, and you might attract ppl 
more easily then you think.

I asked you for a candidate vid application ...

I don't understand, what is the fear about - noone is distracting 
Carl from Core work, by View/VID requests. Carl will be back to gui, 
once he feels Core is stable ...

And I just answered you above - can you read?