World: r4wp

In Rebol, I can put a 'halt at the end of my script to be able to 
read output from my script.  Can I do a similar thing in Red/System?

There is HALT, but I think it's the same as QUIT

If you have a console window in Windows that is closing, you could 
do

until [no]

Or if you're using my C library binding, to not use CPU:

input

OK.  Thanks!

I tried the until [no], but the console window just flashes up and 
disappears really quickly.  I'm assuming that's because it is erroring 
out.  Is there any document on how to debug this type of thing?

I'm trying to convert your file reading code to a general purpose 
function.

There are general purpose functions for text files here in ANSI.reds:

http://red.esperconsultancy.nl/Red-C-library/dir?ci=tip

Can those be easily modified for binary files?

I was still going to make binary versions with the 6502 code. Shouldn't 
be hard. Binary is easier than text

I could do it now if you want?

I would really appreciate that!

OK, I have a suitable hole before my bedtime

ANSI.reds now has read-file-binary

Do I just synchronize that with Fossil?

Yes, if you have that installed, just do

fossil update

Added write-file-binary for good measure

Oops, I'm not returning the binary file length. Have to fix that 
oversight

Added a parameter to make read-file-binary return the file size

OK.

I updated the 6502 emulator to use it, so you can see an example 
there

Luis, the Red Java bridge will be able to call generic Java code, 
so it should be possible to use the App Inventor library

Looking at the current bridge.red, It seems that the return value 
of  a called a method of a Java object is treated as an integer by 
the bridge. Am I correct in thinking that is fine for integers and 
references to Java Objects? I presume logic! will be okay too (if 
caste back ) .


I guess that the bridge doesn't support string or float values yet.

It does in the new bridge version I'm about to push online.

I just need to make some addition to the Red/System compiler before.

That's great news.

Are there any tutorials on how to write programs using Red?  (Not 
Red/System - I know where the documentation is for that.)

What I mean is something like Rebol in 10 steps, but maybe Red in 
10 steps (assuming you already know Rebol).

For instance, I try to compile and run the following simple script:

Red []

img1: load %img1.jpg
print img1

When I run it, I get the following error:

*** Error: word has no value!
unset

I know that Doc says Red isn't ready for general use yet, but I was 
wondering if maybe there were some resources so I could get started 
getting up to speed on it.  When I started learning Rebol, it was 
probably even less complete.

Yeah, Larry Wall bashed it for that

Larry Wall used quite unrelated (and mostly invalid) arguments

No tutorials, though, but there's a fair amount of example code. 
It currently relies on being able to use a lot of REBOL knowledge

The best thing is to program as basic as possible, and always be 
on the watch for missing stuff. For example, LOAD only works on strings, 
and there's no type checking, so it probably used the string value 
of %img1.jpg

With my I/O bindings you can READ a file and then LOAD it, but only 
UTF-8 text

Now that Red/System can read binary files, I could make a facility 
in Red, but it would have to do without a binary! type. I could return 
a handle to low level memory as an integer!

However, there would currently be no facilities to access the content 
at the Red level, so you would have to pass it to Red/System functions 
to do anything with it

REBOL is almost completely made from C! Sometimes hard to follow 
where and how things come together. So happy Red comes to the Redscue.

Can a function be overloaded in Red? Example do-this: function [input 
[integer! c-string!]][either type? input [do-one][do-other] ]

That's not overloading, that's just a conditional

Real overloading is possible in the compiler, but there's currently 
a bug in the interpreter that always makes it use the first function 
definition. This is fixed, but not yet in the master branch

do-this: :do-one

do-this: :do-other

I ask this obviously because I want to replicate the REBOL behaviour 
of the random function that takes different arguments like random 
"abcdef" shuffeling the string; random 1.0 giving a random real between 
0 and 1; random 6 giving an integer from 1 up and to 6. 

So in a sense I need a return type that differs too. REBOL (R3) solves 
this as far as I understand it by returning the pointer to the value 
(and somehow the type of the variable).I ask this obviously because 
I want to replicate the REBOL behaviour of the random function that 
takes different arguments like random "abcdef" shuffeling the string; 
random 1.0 giving a random real between 0 and 1; random 6 giving 
an integer from 1 up and to 6. 

So in a sense I need a return type that differs too. REBOL (R3) solves 
this as far as I understand it by returning the pointer to the value 
(and somehow the type of the variable).

That is twice the same sorry for that! AltMe hung up on me and I 
pasted overenthousiasticly.