World: r4wp

Still surprised that you still needed to buy additional stuff to 
get it working.

Weren't you running bare Debian? That would probably expect you to 
install and configure more yourself

Arnold, the Raspberry is just a motherboard, you'd need a power supply 
and cables at the least :-)

I know LOL!

Kaj: sorry, I wasn't accurate enough, I was referring to hello.red 
output when compiled.

(when run)

The adapter cable I talked about from HDMI to VGA turned out not 
to work. It probably works in the other direction, although I thought 
that wouldn't be possible

Doc, I thought that couldn't be because I can't run any Red code 
on ARM. hello.red crashes hard for me, even taking the terminal program 
down

Does it crash on your RPi?

Yes

(I haven't yet had the chance to test on mine)

Are you running wheezy on it?

Yes, are you running an ARMEL or an ARMHF architecture?

I'm unsure, but as we do support hardware floating points, it should 
be ARMHF I guess.

We support the hardfp ABI. IIRC, Andreas reported that it was working 
on softfp ABI too, but I don't remember exactly, so better wait for 
him to give the right answer.

Anyway, we planned to support more ARM ABI in order to spread on 
more platforms.

Better spread on one platform first :-)

All I can run is empty.reds, Fibonacci, PeterPaint and SQLite

And hello.reds, but not hello.red

I'll look into that as soon as my RPi is set up properly.

Got Mandelbrot to work

Good work.

I see update of docs typo in red-system-specs.txt saw in this file 
that mat operators including % are supported yet in BNF on line 1076 
it is not mentioned.

Also saw a typo, I read the document further tomorrow and note all 
typos I see.

Maths op missing in BNF rules: good catch. You can add them and submit 
a pull request on the master branch.

I will try that, I once did a pull request but it pulling doesn't 
make sense in my mind. I think it means the Github must be pulling. 
I will try again (with possible other improvements. If I am not succesful, 
I will put a file with my improvements up somewhere. Now to work 
(my job waits)

Well I changed some text in this file, I changed it online in a black 
background box where I could not see my cursor nor the arrow pointer, 
so it sucked :( 

I thought it would be possible to edit the file offline but that 
is something to find out how to do next time ;)

Now I added a comment and it says I want to commit 182 changes into 
the master branch, which is not what I want, but Github says I want 
that. Including my comments it could be I typed in total 182 characters 
including the ones I deleted (?) but the 182 are the commits from 
the 0.3.0 branche I think. 

Me and my friend Github >:|

Going to need to shorten that phrase cause I will need it often: 
mamfg!

:-) They are plenty of git / github tutorials online, you might want 
to go through one of them. Having basic git understanding is required 
if you want to contribute code to Red, otherwise, it would take us 
much more time to review and accept it. Anyway, I agree that git 
is unnecessarily complicated, even Linus says it's not for everyone. 
We'll see how Red can solve that once it is mature enough.

Agreed did one today but it was for git not for github. As github 
doesn't support OSX10.5 with her github for mac program I am temp 
stuck. maybe a REBOL script can take over the git commandlines for 
me. I go and try that to take me over the githurdle.

I can't accept your pull request, it's a complete merge of different 
branches (you're probably mixed up several branches, or you haven't 
rebase before submitting the pull request). You need to submit only 
the changes you did. For that, you need to have a clean codebase 
and up-to-date wrt the branch you're modifying.

Looking at the 182 commits you've submitted, it seems, you haven't 
checkout'd to master branch before making the change, so you are 
submitting the whole v0.3.0 branch to merge with master. You need 
to check carefully on which branch you are before doing any change.

I managed to get it via the terminal but only the master not the 
0.3.0 

I want the 0.3.0 version of this file for that one contains the corrected 
typo you fixed, no need to manually correct then. 
And I want to give it then back to the 0.3.0 branche but no way. 
I'll mail my file to the mailinglist :(  github g=sh ;)

You probably need to check out master, then cherry-pick the BNF file 
from v0.3.0, then make your change, then do the pull request for 
master

Alternatively, you'd stay in v0.3.0, but then you also have to make 
the pull request for v0.3.0

The way to switch git branches at the terminal is:

git checkout <branchname>

e.g 
	git checkout master

	git checkout v0.3.0

You can always check which branch you are working on with:

git status

Arnold, no worries. I properly applied your patch against the v0.3.0 
branch.

Your patch was basically fine, what went wrong is that you submitted 
the pull request against the wrong branch. You changed something 
starting from v0.3.0, but your pull request was submitted against 
master, not v0.3.0.

Arnold: the changes you did that were accepted have been pushed to 
master branch too and are now published on red-lang.org. For documentation 
changes, the master branch version is the one that gets published 
on the web site.

FYI: I got my RPi video problem fixed, still no network, but I will 
go buy a  long network cable tomorrow, so I should finally be able 
to look into the issues Kaj submitted. I would like to fix the main 
ones before releasing v0.3.0.

I would like that very much, too

thnx for applying the fix & support. One day I will be able to github 
on my own ;)

Doc - web seems to stopped displaying twitter news messages?

I noticed, you tweeted, that 0.3.0 is close?

btw - once 0.3.0 is out, what about a blog post, summing what is 
already available? Maybe a short script? btw - do we have conditions/branching 
and loops yet?

Twitter message on web site: that's blogger's widget for Twitter's 
feeds...can't do much about it.

Yes, v0.3.0 is close. Of course, I will write a blog post for that 
release, it's a major one. Condition/branching/loops: that's what's 
implied (among other things) by being "Turing-complete". Also, a 
quick look at last 10 days of commit in v0.3.0 branch should answer 
your question too. ;-)

I can't decode anything from inspecting the sources yet. I can look 
into natives, there are some forall-loop etc functions whose purpose 
I don't understand. Then I can see datatypes, but where should I 
look for the definition of 'if, 'either, 'until, 'forall, 'while, 
etc.? :-)

Click on the commit messages where they were implemented