World: r4wp

When I first talked with Carl at length about Rebol in 1997, his 
reason for creating Rebol was because he had learned and used so 
many languages, but they all fell short of his definition of a "perfect" 
language.  He liked Lisp and Smalltalk, but there were issues with 
them as well.  Rebol was his attempt at filling in the holes and 
creating a multi-purpose language that made simple things simple 
to do, while still allowing complex things to be possible.  (I'm 
going back in my memory 16 years here, so I hope Carl forgives me 
if I left something out.)

Because of the above, I can't imagine he wouldn't want to see any 
Rebol-like language to succeed as long as they held true to his vision 
of creating a language that made simple things simple to do, while 
allowing complex things to be possible - with efficiency and cleanness 
of design.

I simply believe, that during the Devcon, it will be the right time 
to exchange some ideas and explanations. Looking forward to the outcome 
of the meeting :-)

there are hundreds of C derived languages, its not that big a deal 
for REBOL to have only a handfull active derivatives.  really, its 
a good thing.

The beauty of freedom from C on all platforms cross-platform, relative 
speed => Red

The flexibility of REBOL to the maximum, remember Red will be a Reduced 
REBOL dialect => R3

Remember Red will be a Reduced REBOL dialect

 That is not true anymore since a while (almost since last summer).

Good to hear this Doc, hadn't realized that, thought there remained 
issues limiting full REBOL like flexibility. New name for Red needed?

The interpreter has lifted all limitations, at least in potential

Red still has {Red]uced resource requirements compared to REBOL

You could also interpret it as an evaluation/REDUCE of REBOL's potential