World: r3wp

In Ruby it would return 3, which is actually very nice in many cases

But I would like to steer it back to Rebol. Actually, since Orca 
needs a name change, it's probably better to fork and do a big name 
change, probably to something like OpenRebol or ORebol. What do people 
think about that ?

Anton, search from "#ifdef LANG_ORCA
" if you want examples of use.

(Kaj, note the body block is empty.)

Jaime, ok..

Anton, I agree with changing Orca's course to be more compatible 
that it is now. On the other hand, I think it would be fairly silly 
to specifically implement REBOL bugs, especially now that R3 is going 
to fix some of them

Still, in Ruby it would return 3. :-) Which I use a lot

Actually, that's another issue:  Do we make a separate fork for R3, 
(considering it may not stabilise for some time.) ?

That seems like overkill. I say develop Orca along with R3, with 
the same features

It's not like the differences are huge - one of the advantages of 
the high abstraction level

But we don't know what R3 is yet.

We don't know what Orca's going to be, either :-)

I think we're talking details here

Anton, In order to speed coding you could just target cloning.

I think it's wise to fork Orca, to be clear about the name and the 
direction it's going.

And the easiest way for that is add the missing natives and mezz.

Anton why fork. There is nobody else developing it.

Once the all the natives and mezz are completed then we can talk 
about enhancements.

Like Kaj request for returning the last element.

Hmm.. So you think there is lots of work that can still be done before 
the need to fork becomes a strong issue.

Exactly

Pick the low-hanging fruit. There's a lot left here

Ok, so we can pool our resources and leave the arguments til a later 
stage.

Yup

Alright, sounds reasonable.

You see the light!

I had to work through the issues. :)

It's good to know where everyone stands.

I agree with Kaj here ... develop what is missing, then go R3 route 
compatibility wise .... good aproach imo!

so I think we have got general agreement about the course here?

Now just how to make those 3 rumoured complete rebol clones authors 
to release the code to Orca? :-)

Life is funny for months, I encourage people to work on Orca, when 
KarlR and myself decide to quit, we get new fuel. Funny.

Cycles of energy.

Karl wants to quit Orca?

is there anything fruitfull in R#, which could be donated to Orca? 
Have you talked to Doc? He will imo never return to R# anyway .... 
:-)

Jaime, I told you to have perseverence :-)

I talked to many gurus, but none wants to work together, too many 
lone wolfs here.

It doesn't matter now, Orca works, it is just missing completeness 
in natives and that I the port system.

You can't expect a deep thing like a language platform to catch on 
within a few months, or even a few years. Especially not without 
any advertising

hmm, what a pity ... if all agree, that having OS Rebol is a good 
thing, even for RT, then I wonder why noone want to release? What 
is the point in having Rebol clone sitting on own hd, unreleased?

The port systems is the big task. Becuase I want something new. I 
don't like the current problems with the existing design.

You know how Steve Dekorte has been doing it with Io for more than 
four years, that's the way to do it

new system?

Pekr, they can sell their solutions with their own proprietary language.

ah, then business activities ....

Kaj, Yes. I have study that well, but we need native co-routines.

There is no free-lunch

I mean the way Steve works

Pekr, another reason is shyness and desire of learning only. So they 
avoid any legal problems. However I don't see how a clone can have 
legal implications. It is not like we are copying the src code, and 
re-engineering is allowed.

Kaj. I don't follow you. Do you mean his leadership style?