World: r3wp

the use of R3 as a name is less annoying.  I hate saying rebel in 
conversation when refering to it.   it really doesn't give a good 
impression.  which is why I do my best NOT to pronounce it rebel, 
but rEbOl.

I just realised that a nice same could be "square", in reference 
to its orthogonality and the use of square brakets.

R3 is my opinion is not great.  I work in a company that deals with 
a large installation of SAP, which is often referred to SAP R/3. 
 This may change one day, but I don't know when, it's a major undertaking 
upgrading this environment.  Also, what do you do when you increment 
R3 to the next major release, rename again to R4, or start calling 
it R3 v2 or something of the like?

yep... R4  :-)  the number is invisible.   we understand that its 
an increment of R

but its not the product name, just used in discussion.

to be clear   "R3 is my opinion is not great."  should read "R3 in 
my opinion is not a great name either"
.

so you are saying rename Rebol to R

nope, just refer to rebol using that instead of REBOL, once you explained 
the acronym.

that could work

but rebol is a backronym, so its relative precision is... well, imperfect, 
at least.

the fact that name change comes back over and over IS a clue to the 
fact that the name isn't well chosen.


its aggressive, that's all there is to it for me.  if rebol was called 
"goat" "lisa" or "amigo".   we wouldn't care about the name... it 
would just be a label, but rebol, which is intended to be a spin 
on rebel, isn't passive.  it has some kind of "I know better than 
you" tone to it, which REALLY doesn't cross well in the real-world 
marketplace.

R is a scientific language primarily used for statistics

I'd prefer any non negative  name.  charm, zen, other, speak, do, 
make, eureka, sanskript, gaya, bobcat, merlot, elemental, message, 
companion, velvet.


rebol has no "name to upkeep"  after all these years, rebol.org doesn't 
even have 1000 scripts, come on.   REBOL technologies doesn't have 
to change its name, the language is a product of a company.


R.E.B.O.L  WITH the dots, could stay in reference to the technology 
upon which the language is built, but even that isn't very precise 
to begin with.


an acronym so closely tied to the technology binds the technology, 
or looses its meaning as the technology evolves.  The best names 
are abstract to what they represent .

Bringing up a forgotten feature from early R3 days:

>> a: [a b c]
== [a b c]

>> a: next a
== [b c]

>> clear head a
== []

>> a
== [] ; Script Error: Out of range or past end in R2

>> past? a
== true ; new for R3

>> tail? a
== true

Just for fun :-)

How aout PEBOL instead of REBOL ... where P stands for Prototypical 
,and the name sounds like people to show that it is people friendly 
:)

Changing the default file extension to .r3 from .r would be even 
better than changing REBOL's name for me.

Max: I agree with you: REBOL is not an acronym, it is a backronym. 
Examining the "Relative Expression Based Object Language":

*"Relative Language" does not have a standard meaning

*"Expression Based Language" - standard is "Expression Oriented Language"

*"Object Language" - standard is "Object-based", or "Object Oriented"

Peter, I agree. That's what I'm doing on my system already.

sounds like the acronym came first and the meaning second

So should we call it REOOL?

RECOOL

nice :) "C" is for what?

communication?

Don't know it just sounds better. I'm not a fan to give such words 
a meaning.

Better to use an artificial name.

From time to time the topic "renaming REBOL" rises up. It is because 
we have nothing to do apart waiting for the Genius :-)

Let's call it: BRANETUTL

BRAin NEeded To Undestrand This Language.

although there is no chance that a new name gets chosen;
areaL
a reflexive, expressive and adaptive Language

This is Carl's baby -- He should decide the name and we should not 
have any say-so in it unless we're invited by him to do so.

We in fact are invited to do so, or were a while ago, when there 
was a discussion about it.

I stand corrected.  Whatever Carl decides will be just fine by me.

I fixed my StRIP packer (based on RIP but the result is enbased instead 
of binary data - I had a reason to do this) for R3. Packs directories 
and I added one refinement - /code - you can add additional code 
that is run after unpacking the archive. So you can use that directory 
just as a temp dir and then move files somewhere else or anything 
you want. It's basically  a package manager, a very spartan one, 
but good enough for me. Get form next line (to prevent that extremly 
old and stupid AltME links bug).

http://box.lebeda.ws/~rebolek/rebol/StRIP.r

Only a few weeks to Xmas ... has Santa Carl got any thing for us?

I suspect BrianH, Maxim and Cyphre wake up when the host code is 
released. That'll be enough for me. :-)

See the blog :)

Cyphre, onmy computer  with your mandelbrot-int.r script i get :

rebol 2 VM 2.7.6.31 : 0:00:03.904
rebol 3 (2.100.95a): REBOL Elapsed 0:00:04.354   


my computer in intel core i5  750 , 4Go DDR3 1333MHz Gygabyte P55UD3 
 

so maybe you should upgrade  ( and i'm sur where i lost most of the 
time where in the consol exists)

(oh and i had a 3D game running on the computer at same time...)

question is ... rebol is actually developed for deprecated hardware 
or for tomorow's hardware ?

R3 64bit builds should be optimized for tomorrow's hardware. The 
32bit builds should be optimized for netbooks.

but to run the 64 bit version you need to have windows 7 64 bit which 
is francly useless when 99% of your softwares are still 32 bits....

So far, we only have 32bit builds, and there has only been one optimized 
version, likely not the final settings either.

Or Linux 64bit, or OS X 10.6, or....  We will have both 64bit and 
32bit REBOL builds. Use the one that suits you best.

yeah but i like the  benchmarks based on deprecated harware ... as 
you could see  on a today's computer (and not even to top mark one) 
 the gap betwin R2 and R3 isn't so wide as stated by cyphre...

brianH the only  OS where it means something to be in 64 bit is linux 
.... because you havec access to 

the source code of most of you software including the linux kernel 
and you can recompile them to optimise them to your hardware. With 
this important limitation ....as linux is not industry supported 
most of now in day hardware isn't full power supported ... so the 
optimisation part goes to waste...

For new hardware, the platforms limited to 32bit tend to be the ones 
where performance is a problem. If you want to run 32bit code on 
anything other than a netbook, then your hardware is overkill. The 
big boxes are switching to 64bit. And it matters a lot for R3 since 
integer math is 64bit even on 32bit builds.

yeah but this means you posses the drivers and the user end software 
that goes with you brand new 64 bit os and hardware

Windows has been going 64bit since XP/2003, and is going that way 
in a big way with 7/2008r2. OS X is going 64bit with 10.6 - 32bit 
only matters for 10.5 and below. Only on Linux is 64bit a problem, 
mostly for 32bit backwards compatibility.

brianH and since then the windows 64  bits is more than a candestine 
OS ... (i'm asking myself if windows OSes  in 64 bit are more used 
on eath than rebol or not ...)