World: r4wp
[!REBOL3] General discussion about REBOL 3
older newer | first last |
Bo 21-Dec-2012 [250] | Henrik, now that you mention it, I do recall that. But wouldn't it be even better if we could have access to the current AltME source code and just work from there? Unfortunately, OpenME may not be the best name because there is a trojan virus with the same name. It would be great if there were some basic instructions for people wanting to try out the current latest version of OpenME in the Readme of the OpenME project on github. |
Henrik 21-Dec-2012 [251] | Bo, possibly, but as I see it, AltME has some specific design flaws, such as dependency on world servers we have no control over. We decided not to let a trojan decide whether the name should be used or not. |
Oldes 21-Dec-2012 [252] | For me Altme is almost unusable if not used on Windows. I miss a way how to customize it. Just 2 font size versions and hardcoded font is a big problem. |
AdrianS 21-Dec-2012 [253] | Andreas, do you know what a scripting language needs to have in order to be included by default? Is it just a matter of popularity? |
Arnold 21-Dec-2012 [254] | I use Altme on my Macbook. AltMe has some flaws on the Mac but it certainly is not unusuable for me. Are you referring to Linux versions David? On the Mac it is possible to zoom in easily if the sight is the problem. |
AdrianS 21-Dec-2012 [255] | Bo, along with open sourcing AltME, the R3 chat would be good to have opened as well. This has been asked of Carl on the blog (more than once), but the question keeps being ignored. Almost as if on purpose - might be possible that Carl is trying to figure out a way to monetize that side of Rebol. |
Bo 21-Dec-2012 [256] | I've had a number of face-to-face conversations with Carl recently, and I don't get that feeling at all. I'm sure it's just a matter of time - Carl is highly pressed for time in his current job. Plus, now he is spending a lot of time looking over the R3 code changes on git and merging them. |
Andreas 21-Dec-2012 [257x3] | AdrianS: I think scripting languages are only part of the base installation if they are needed by some other part of the base installation. |
But I'm not sure Ubuntu has a published or defined policy for what's included by default in the base or desktop installations. I think it's a decision made by a board. | |
In case anyone wants R3 builds from most recent source without going through the hassle of building itself: - OSX x86: http://bolka.at/2012/rebol3/r3-2.5-845b60a0 - Win32 x86: http://bolka.at/2012/rebol3/r3-3.1-845b60a0.exe - Linux x86: http://bolka.at/2012/rebol3/r3-4.4-845b60a0 | |
Robert 22-Dec-2012 [260] | Core or View? |
PeterWood 22-Dec-2012 [261] | Thanks Andreas |
Andreas 22-Dec-2012 [262] | From Carl's official Git repository, so they are "Core". |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [263] | Does it make sense to have nightly builds? |
Andreas 22-Dec-2012 [264] | I think so, yes. That's why we have them, already :) Preparing it for publication. |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [265] | I can't keep up with all this information, sorry. :-) |
Andreas 22-Dec-2012 [266x2] | No worries, It's the first time I mention it. |
And it's only vapour at the moment anyway :) | |
GiuseppeC 22-Dec-2012 [268] | Robert, is it possible to show JPEG images using your R3 GUI ? |
Robert 22-Dec-2012 [269] | I don't think so, even the JPG source is there in R3. We have added PNG support. |
Bo 22-Dec-2012 [270x2] | JPG support in R3 would be amazing, even though I know it would bloat the size of the executable by a significant amount. Maybe it could be available as a plug-in so if you don't need JPG support, you don't have to sacrifice the space. |
I'm speaking of being able to write JPGs. I see now that the discussion was about reading JPGs. | |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [272] | This was supposed to be supported through media types. |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [273] | I've got a question about using MakeDoc/MakeDoc Pro vs Markdown/MultiMarkdown. Are there significant advantages with MakeDoc that outweigh going with Markdown which seems to be the defacto standard for lightweight markup? I guess when MakeDoc first came out it was pretty unique, but if you were to need this kind of tool today wouldn't it make sense to use something with wider adoption? |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [274] | No. Better is better. |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [275] | That's not much of an answer, Scot. I was hoping that someone who is familiar with these markups can say something specific to help me decide if I'll ever have to make the choice. I could go through each and compare the features side by side, but maybe someone has already done that (haven't found any comparisons). |
Andreas 22-Dec-2012 [276x2] | Unless you already are invested in tools one way or the other, I'd go with Markdown these days. |
On a pure feature basis, I think make-doc-pro somewhat surpasses plain Markdown. I fear you'll have to decide on your own if you need something MDP adds. | |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [278] | Andreas: Sorry. I wasn't really commenting as much on Make-Doc-Pro as the impending realization that we are going to see a ton of forks branching off. Make-Doc and Make-Doc-Pro have been associated in my mind with the "official" RT over the years. Hopefully the R3 team will be able to keep this thing focused. Still not sure who those people are. As long as Mark Down is pure Rebol, I suppose I don't have much preference. Rebol has always taken the high road, so if MDP is better, I think we should stick with it. Widespread adoption has never been as important as top quality better design. If we continue to adopt whatever is widespread we'll end up losing everything that is better. Amiga OS, Be OS, QNX Nutrino, etc. All far better OS designs than Unix and Windows NT. What do we end up with? Unix and NT and of course the dreaded DOM (don't try to convince me that a flavor of Linux is anything more than a Unix OS). So better is better. If MDP is better, then we should adopt it, not because it is widespread, but because it is better. |
Robert 22-Dec-2012 [279] | The thing is that MD markup is supported by quite some Wiki engines etc. |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [280] | MDP struggles with markdown syntax. We talked about rewriting it with a cleaner implementation. |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [281] | I write my code in Rebol, because the concepts behind Rebol are the most advanced and human centered I've found (I have written code in 30 languages and now that I've seen the source I code I can tell you it is by far the most elegant thing I've ever seen. |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [282] | Henrik: So MDP was intended to parse Markdown syntax to a certain degree? |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [283] | Robert: Do it. Make MDP cleaner. Then we make a Wiki that uses the cleaner MDP. Or fix MarkDown so it is better than MDP. |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [284] | Scot, any markup could be parsed/processed by Rebol. So my question here was about the syntax/features. |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [285x3] | AdrianS: I'm not sure of the origins, but it has some problems with nested styles, using them inside () and use of styles with no spaces. |
You can't inline URLs either. | |
I would like to see an MDP that was built on top of markdown, which then utilizes headlines, TOC and glossary. | |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [288] | AdrianS: That is a better question. What have we learned about the approach taken by MDP versus MarkDown. I am personally much more inline with the approach taken by MDP. It hasn't been attended to in quite some time. |
Robert 22-Dec-2012 [289] | The MDP code is quite a bit a mess. So, perhaps it's better to reuse the name as mark-down-pro |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [290] | Now we can attend to the things that were elegantly conceived but never really developed. MDP is one example. I like the exclusivist nature of Rebol. I like the fact that I can do my architecture from back to front without ever leaving Rebol. |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [291] | Well, if the Markdown syntax is too limited, there's also MultiMarkdown which has the benefit of being a superset of Markdown. |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [292] | Yes, Make Doc Pro really doesn't scale well. |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [293] | So what would it take to make a Make Doc that can scale? |
AdrianS 22-Dec-2012 [294x2] | I think you keep mixing up the implementation of processing any of these markups being done in Rebol (which you prefer, and I don't question this) with the actual markup. |
Sorry, that was addressed at you, Scot. | |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [296] | Scot, it has to be rewritten. The code is a mess. So, we could start with a pure markdown parser and build on top of that. |
Scot 22-Dec-2012 [297x2] | AdrianS: Not mixing at all. I am done with taking something like MarkDown which is limited in syntax and "adding features" to make it do more things. That's how the beast we call the DOM came to be. An awful thing. You can't talk about the syntax without talking about the design of the parser. They can't be separated. |
That's the whole point of dialects. MDP is a dialect of Rebol. It needs attention. | |
Henrik 22-Dec-2012 [299] | I'm not sure what markdown has to do with the DOM? |
older newer | first last |