World: r3wp

simple and svn cannot be used in the same sentence, if I recall correctly.

But the reason I use DevBase (R3 Chat) is because it has accept/deny 
recordkeeping.

cvs is hell, but svn is really simple, at least on windows it is.

for example, with tortoise, its integrated directly inside the file 
explorer  :-)

Well, anyway, that's not the blocking factor.

Yes, I have tortoise, but I don't use it much... because it's not 
that practical for work flow.

So, Maxim, what's your main Dev system, is it Win32?

So, here's a rough game plan...

yep.  I also have a mac-mini now, so can also do some test on that.

but my mac is  not setup for C coding ... (yet)

I use visual C++ studio express.  (free and simple)

Ah, ok... I build on the Mac-Mini here as well... because it by far 
shows me more coding errors than anything else... yep, the big endian 
smacks hard.

hehe

What size is that? C++ S.E.

had dun with unicode   I guess  ;-)

So, the plan is to try go get the build mechanism setup again for 
the host development method.

Then, I'll probably just drop you a zip of everything for you to 
try it and tell me what problems pop up.

A few days of smoothing it out... and we should be good to go.  But 
note...

installed... 226MB  (seems to include a few extra tools like C# and 
VB

I want to migrate the graphics dialects (parsed via DELECT) into 
COMMANDS (yes, like in extensions).

do we have some access to R3 funcs into Extensions?

(from extentions)

That's a big topic. One we should move elsewhere, because it's likely 
to be many pages long.

Anyway, I'll put together a more detailed plan and get it to you. 
 I want this to go quickly, but not waste any of our time.

be sure that the moment I get some form of host code or plan I'll 
react to it ASAP.  This is the main "holding back" of R3 right now 
IMHO.

Got to go... but I'll work on a core-only host package for tonight. 
That's a good way to sync up, because the whole thing is simpler 
to make and link.

Carl - have I said anything about difficulcy of getting source via 
R3 Chat? What I told is - we should not worry about much of the input, 
because even nowadays, not many ppl is using R3 Chat alone, not to 
mention getting sources via R3 Chat.

just a note - COMMAND. I was thinking lately, if the word is not 
too good to be used for extensions? Commands fit dialects. I thought 
that we could use ROUTINE in Extensions. But I know that it might 
be late for the change, or that I have maybe shifted understanding 
of what "command" word actually means ...

Pekr, command! functions will be used in dialects too. That is why 
the name was chosen.

Just giving a little report about a very interesting chat I had with 
Carl:


- Host code package is in the works... given priority.  My impression 
is that Carl is really wanting for this to happen.  If any of you 
feel you can actually participate and do real tests and work, now 
is the time to raise your voice.
 

- Devices and the Extensions dll code are part of the host code. 
  Thus, by extrapolation...  We (i.e. Not Carl) could work on a model 
of Device extensions and propose it to Carl, if anyone (or group) 
wants to put the effort.  obviously using the current Extensions 
as the reference...


- As it stands now, adding Native Datatypes is complex outside of 
the rebol core  (ex: in host code) because of a few issues (GC integration 
being a major one).


- Carl isn't against the idea of finding a way to add Native (binary) 
user datatype but it most probably will have to wait a bit until 
Carl and Host developers find a way to make it simple and bug free. 
 a possible idea is to bave a special extension model which acts 
as a datatype marshaller, with defined commands as datatype actions 
(aka accessors in other languages).


- Talked a little bit about threads, but nothing really specific 
to say about it... I'll need to try it in practice so I can ask relevant 
questions.

I don't like point 2) - I think that Carl knows best, how to add 
integration of Devices, eventual callbacks, images, etc. - simply 
the requested stuff. We (the community) should use extensions, we 
should not try to develop its API.

It is a language author call imo ...

Carl will say no if he doesn't like it.  


but do you really think that people which are going to be actively 
helping out in adding this type of code to the host to stray far 
from any ideals Carl may have?

the case is to have a core group of people improving the host in 
parralel.

yes, I understand ... for later, maybe. But as for initial release, 
I would prefer Carl to implement (in regards to extensions) what's 
on a priority list. Believe me - if you shoul Carl, that maybe one 
day we have some ideas here or there, we will not get it for 3.0, 
as Carl will move onto other things.

shoul = show

If a few of us take up the task of managing all of the extensions/device 
interface code, that means Carl can work on other things.  Carl has 
already given us a reference on his idea of how to integrate native 
code into R3.  I wouldn't have done it any differently, honestly.


in any case, we will discuss it with Carl before commiting to any 
time to implementing it.

Exactly - we should be sure, that the design aspect is acceptable 
for Carl, in order to be accepted as a default part of the distro. 
The last thing we need that in such an initial stage, we will end-up 
with one host layer per one developer ;-)

obviously.  Never said it differently.    :-)

as a concrete example, if its possible for me to add image! support 
in Extensions right now (code, test, examples, documentation).... 
I will, and if its done properly, Carl will just be happy to sign 
off on it.

if not, he'll point me in the right direction.  then, when I get 
to vectors... the chance that I get it wrong will be smaller, but 
we have to start somewhere.   We actually have to start doing it 
and stop just talking about it.  :-P

If Carl is needed to really implement devices well, at least we can 
help by getting the almost-well implementations done, so all Carl 
has to do is tweak and merge. We can do a lot of research...

True.

yep... the grunt work is where Carl can use our help.

Solve the annoying hardware issues and connection issues, even proving 
it with examples, and then Carl can just intigrate...

devices could also be used for things like IPC or callbacks.   so 
we could test out different ways to improve multi-threading in rebol 
before commiting to a specific method.

Note: As Carl said for tasking - "the model is: threaded CPU, shared 
memory, shared symbol space, shared system function space, separate 
evaluation stacks, separate user contexts.""

Shared write-protected structures too, afaict.

Now is THE TIME!!!!!! .... for REBOL to claim the king of PARSE!!!!! 
  this is where all REBOL marketing needs to focus IMMEDIATELY!!!!

Yeah I know many people here think I hate REBOL -  but truth is I 
love REBOL more than most of you and I want REBOL DOMINATION!!!!!