World: r4wp

Also, to be able to see any output in DOS console from an encapped 
Rebol app, I needed to change a flag in the executable file (sub-system: 
`console` instead of `GUI`).

you can also set an attribute in the header for it to be generated 
as a console app.

Really? I missed that in the docs.

Oh, might be the -c option for enabling the CGI mode, is that the 
one?

Hum, no, doesn't seem to work for DOS console.

similar, I think you just need to add cgi in the encap header attribute

its been a very long time (7 years) and I think its an undocumented 
feature he added just for me.  :-)

CGI option in header does not work for DOS it seems. The only way 
is to set it a flag manually in the exe.

argh... can't remember the flag it needed. memory escapes me.

but its definitely there.

Doc - does encapper means, that we don't need to use R2 console anymore, 
and that Red distro will contain red executable, which will be able 
to compile and run the scripts?

Only if you don't want to use "cutting edge" versions from github:)

I think that the far future plane is to have Red be made in Red.. 
now it's a little bit fake:) Probably to make it easier for potencial 
newcommeres.

yes, I expect it still being dependent upon R2. What I would do probably, 
is to add R2 for various systems directly into Git repo, I mean - 
executables, and make it - invisible to the user ...

ok, posted to FB ...

Thanks for the insight into how you got around that problem, Doc!

Pekr: answer is yes to your above question. But I will wait after 
the 0.3.3 release to add a Red binary to the repo and a build script 
to encap the Red compiler. Also I need to update documentation and 
see with Andreas how we can set up automated builds for each new 
commits.

I forgot that I also need to merge Red and Red/System compiler front-ends, 
so they will be some work for that future release with binary Red. 
I will probably bump the version number to 0.4.0 for that future 
release.

Oldes: you're right, but the encapped Red is just a convenience to 
make it easier to try and use for anyone as we're getting closer 
to a Red beta.

Doc, I admire your consistent work and progress!

Yes, me too.

Doc - Red beta? :-) Half of features are still missing, I would like 
us getting into alpha in few months :-)

Pekr - Every day is a day closer to Red beta.

I don't think he said he was close to a Red beta, but closer.

Depends on what you compare with. Compared to most languages, Red 
has lots of extra features. If you want to compare with REBOL, then 
a lot is missing from Red, but also a lot of Red features are missing 
from REBOL

As for me, Alpha means - feature complete, just instable imo, while 
still tweaks here or there might appear. And beta means - 100% feature 
complete, freezed, just bugfixes ...

Red doesn't fit that. It's not feature complete, but it's stable

And Red is missing a lot - objects, IO, networking, parse, and no, 
having R/S libraries for such purpose available does not make it 
any more feature complete. R/S is a different language and should 
be treated as that ...

No objections towards Red stability ....

What, more features don't make it more feature complete?

No, because I am not interested to use R/S, unless necessary.

In almost all my programs, I have a mix of Red and Red/System, very 
tightly integrated. It's a mistake to regard them as separate languages

And Doc himself claims from very beginning, that R/S is mostly for 
integrators, as you are. Most ppl will look into Red, and find such 
features missing. I am really not interested into some Curl binding, 
I want Rebol level ports, etc. based networking. So our milleage 
might vary ...

Yes, this is something we found out along the way. Red/System is 
very powerful

I have nothing against R/S, in fact - I am liking the overall Red 
architecture. I somehow can't explain it, dunno. Simply put - I worry, 
that basing my programs upon some already existing bindings is risky, 
as Red will provide its own solution later, which will make it incompatible 
imo ...

You will keep making those thought mistakes as long as you don't 
start programming

It is kind of Osbourne syndrom with me - waiting for native Red implementation, 
instead of using what is available ... strange feeling ...

As in Ozzy?

not, wikipedia term :-) Ozzy is metal singer :-)

Not familiar with any other kinds of Osbourne syndrome

Osbourne syndrome is, when company announces some product, its features, 
not releasing it for some time, and customers stop buying their product, 
as they wait for new and better stuff to appear ...

Oh, that Osbourne

That was REBOL. Red is released all the time, so you should start 
yesterday

With a new Red release, you don't have to throw away your previous 
Red. It's still in there. And you don't even have to pay for the 
new

What's the easiest way to try Red/System? I see do/system and #system 
[ ... ] suggestions in the docs:
http://static.red-lang.org/red-system-specs.html#section-17

, but I don't seem to get it to work.

do/system is unimplemented, #system and #system-global are

But for just using Red/System, giving your program a Red/System header 
is easiest

It's easiest to start from the included examples/tests

Ok, I'll look at those.

I agree.  I haven't done much with Red yet, but Red/System is great. 
 I wish it was easier to work with strings, but I guess that's when 
I'd want to be using Red.