World: r4wp

The interpreter (DO) is much more capable than the current console 
with its currently limited tokenizer (LOAD). So, e.g., the interpreter 
fully supports paths and refinements while the console don't.

Nobody has proposed me so far to build a R2-level cross-platform 
console for Red, so I will implement one in the next weeks. Before 
that, I will probably work on PIC support for Mach-O and ELF and 
implement object! support.

Exciting!

That's great Doc!

Bo, you could use the 0MQ bindings to pass the images between Red 
and R3

I've never really looked into 0MQ, but I know you did some binding 
work with that.

Sorry Doc, it is hard to get-and-keep up to what you all achieve!! 
(And Kaj too) Even though I myself have less hours at my job I do 
not have as much time to follow it all. (More projects and chores 
in and about the house to do now and less 'spare' time at work for 
a quick review.

I will try to answer the question of how I see possibilities to make 
Red more suitable for funding. And have it get the attention a first 
proper release needs. Everybody else is hereby invited to think along 
how to make this possible.

What I see as a first possible step is have a kind of Red website 
hosting where websites can be hosted using Red (cheyenne server) 
and a database behind it (MySQL or SQLite) and a possibility for 
digital payments (such a module could be additionally payed and kept 
'closed' source). This could obviously generate a modest cashflow.
There would be needed books etc.

time is up now sorry.

I'm happy to report that Red works well on stock Windows 2000

Even most of the bindings work, except GTK and 0MQ, because their 
libraries are not compatible with 2000

Perhaps it could be helped by installing newer versions of the Windows 
C library

Arnold: finding good ideas for new revenue streams to fund Red would 
be indeed helpful.

Kaj: interesting finding, but no that surprizing as the interfacing 
of Red with Windows API is currently quite limited.

I need that setup to test, and I may need it to compile binding libraries 
myself

0MQ also doesn't work on XP, so that's more surprising and problematic

The 0MQ issue may be with newer bulids. I used old versions on XP 
just fine.

Not from Red of course.

Beating the test suite alone is perhaps an unwise quest, so here 
is an as-is state of the Red port for people to tinker with and look 
at.  https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/pull/421

R2-level cross-platform console for Red
 would be great!! Thanks Doc!

Nice addition indeed. That will differ it from R3 too ....

Thanks for the report, Gregg. It could also be that this XP machine 
doesn't have networking. Perhaps Windows doesn't understand that 
it can use localhost

That's a massive patch, Fork

It's impressive and depressing at the same time, because there are 
so many differences between R2 and R3. My CMS was much less work 
to port because I wrote it in very basic REBOL specifically to avoid 
these problems

Thanks, yes, impressive and depressing about sums it up.  :-)

The most annoying parts of course being when obscure bugs in Rebol 
itself lead you on wild goose chases, but that's one of the reasons 
why I think that the largest and most actively developed codebase 
written in Rebol should be stressing R3, not R2, which is dead.

It is my hope that the R2 legacy can be shed, but clearly it is not 
the time today...maybe a couple of months.  R3 patches must be taken 
in a timely manner. The current situation is untenable, so we are 
going to have to agree on a development branch.

Well, it's not the largest code base. Most active, I don't know

The most optimal path is to shed the legacy of R3, as well, and bootstrap 
straight into Red

Kaj, sometimes an interpreted language is optimal, and other times 
a compiled language is.  I hope both R3 and Red will become fully 
functional released software.

Bo: Red has an interpreter built-in.

Either I didn't know that or I forgot.  Thanks for reminding me!

It would be fun to have you comment on the next Syllable article 
on OSNews, where some people have taken it upon themselves to paint 
me as unable to handle compiled languages :-)

If Rebol were not open source and if there were not Rebol-focused 
designers such as BrianH/etc I would be very much on the "bootstrap 
ASAP and escape this ecology" point of view.

But I think that what we must realize is that Rebol and Red are essentially 
occupying a mostly similar design space, where the design choices 
getting hammered out, correct, and consistent are more important 
than performance...and will be for a while longer.

To me this lends a prioritization balance such that what's good for 
Rebol 3 is good for Red, and bootstrap should be delayed until those 
issues have been solved intelligently and in a way that converges 
the two.

Rebol's conventional ANSI C implementation makes it more "boring" 
than Red, but this boringness will be an advantage in pitching the 
interpreter as a replacement for awk/sed/whatever-crap-people-are-using. 
 If they cannot read the source or understand the toolchain, they 
will be suspicious.

A healthy Rebol gives Red another avenue for attack, especially if 
any *unnecessary* incompatibilities have been hammered out.

At first Rebol's boring and (to my taste) "shooting from the hip" 
C source code, a relic of another era, got me down a little.  But 
it's very clear.  The boringness is an asset, it plays well with 
others...

Convergence is key in my mind as well Brian.

Red is going to freak a lot of people out, despite being open source. 
 Having both options gives more growth potential, and the easier 
it is to walk between them the more strength the whole ecology will 
have.

I think a different class of people will freak out, in a good way, 
over Red.

@Fork: Precisely why Carl chose to use C...cross platform compatibility 
and clean coding.  As far as code goes, I'd much prefer "boring" 
to "messy" or "complicated".

What is Red being developed in?

Kaj - I would definitely stay away frorm publishing Syllable news 
to OSnews, if it is related to Red/REBOL only, it creates very negative 
ractions ....

Bo - I think it is being developed in Red/System?

Bo, it's done in Red/System. The big advantage is that it has a very 
simple and portable tool-chain, much smaller than C.

Bo - I can suggest you to look into following slides - http://www.red-lang.org/p/about.html

You know what they say: any publicity is good publicity