REBOL 3.0 mentioned on the blog!
[1/20] from: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 10-Mar-2006 10:19
Hi guys,
hopefully good times ahead for us rebollers! Just go and read "Time for
big changes" blog article:
http://www.rebol.net/article/0259.html
Cheers,
-pekr-
[2/20] from: fergus4:bellatlantic at: 10-Mar-2006 8:37
Any idea what kind of changes we will be seeing...
Petr Krenzelok wrote:
[3/20] from: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 10-Mar-2006 14:54
Alan Macleod wrote:
> Any idea what kind of changes we will be seeing...
>
well, not yet, but I expect REBOL 3.x to introduce incompatibilities,
but for the good. I expect it to:
- have multiasking/threading high concurency, maybe message based, dunno
- have modules support
- being just one .exe, the rest as dynamically loadable components
- some parts even - as for gfx, sound, will support plug-in architecture
(for codecs e.g.)
- RT will keep Core (kernel) of the language and the rest will be
open-sourced to some extent
- other features already discussed - RIF, Rebin, language plug-ins for
language extensibility
- I heard also View will be overhauled - faster blitting, new
compositing engine, better event system
Simply put - all things we wished for in the last few years will
hopefully come. If RT is concentrated, I expect Core 3.0 alpha till the
end of the year personally, but that is just my guess based upon how
quickly was Contra (1.0 to 2.0 rewrite) brought to life - it was
actually few months IIRC. Now language as a technology is already pretty
much in good state, so I expect RT "just" putting it into more robust
surrounding framework ....
Once again - that is just my opinion ....
-pekr-
[4/20] from: hallvard::ystad::gmail::com at: 11-Mar-2006 20:46
On 10/03/06, Petr Krenzelok <petr.krenzelok-trz.cz> wrote:
>
> well, not yet, but I expect REBOL 3.x to introduce incompatibilities,
> but for the good. I expect it to:
>
> [...]
> Simply put - all things we wished for in the last few years will
> hopefully come.
Unicode?
[5/20] from: gchillemi::aliceposta::it at: 12-Mar-2006 11:05
>> Simply put - all things we wished for in the last few years will
>> hopefully come.
> Unicode?
Multitasking ?
3D support ?
NiceUI ?
Good development enviromnent ?
I have never had the needing for those features. I can still live with View
1.3.2 ;-)
Giuseppe Chillemi
[6/20] from: SunandaDH::aol::com at: 12-Mar-2006 5:49
Pekr:
> Simply put - all things we wished for in the last few years will
> hopefully come.
The main thing I wish for is compatibility -- some of us don't want to have
to rewrite code because the old code breaks the new interpreter.
It is not efficient to keep having to reformat or rejig data from one version
of REBOL to another. Same as it is not efficient in the more physical world
to have to unload goods from a truck to repack them in a train or boat; that
sort of stuff is early 20th Century,
If code is just data, and data is everything, I ought to be able to stick it
in the equivalent of a TEU and have it go anywhere in the REBOLsphere.
Sunanda.
[7/20] from: massung::gmail at: 12-Mar-2006 9:40
I agree. REBOL, interestingly enough, is the first language I use where I
don't feel a compelling need for syntax highlighting or some uber-IDE to
program in. The desktop and console work just fine.
As per 3D support, I would personally like to keep REBOL as small as
possible. I understand that I'm in the "noob" crowd still, but that is one
of REBOL's most appealing features, IMO. The fact that I could actual read
about (and retain 90%) of the language in 24 hours was a very pleasant
experience. I'd just leave it to others to create game engines or such as
dynamic libraries and import them into REBOL using a wrapper.
I think multi-threading would be nice, but it doesn't need to be
over-the-top. Just a way to execute a block in another thread, and return a
thread handle. Something as simple as:
>> foo: make thread! [ forever [ print "Hello, world!" ] ]
== Thread Handle: 0x02020
The list of functions needed would be fairly small: thread? kill pause
resume and perhaps a way of setting priority. One example of where this is
useful would be opening multiple consoles from the same environment. So far,
I haven't found a way to run the desktop and the console at the same time.
Hardly a problem worth adding a feature over, though. REBOL is so small that
opening 10 instances isn't a big deal. Still, it could be useful.
Most of what I'd like to see involve little, minute additions to the
language that, while I could simply write the mezzanine functions myself,
would be worthy additions. Some kind of MAP function is my big one at the
moment. The one thing I can say I miss from the VID is the ability to right
justify controls, but there's probably a way to do it already that I'm
missing.
My 2 cents.
Jeff M.
--
massung-gmail.com
On 3/12/06, Giuseppe Chillemi <gchillemi-aliceposta.it> wrote:
[8/20] from: massung:g:mail at: 12-Mar-2006 9:44
Something I forgot to mention, though, about multi-threading. This is
potentially a gigantic can of worms to open. If we suddenly had to start
worrying about critical sections, mutexes, locking global variables, etc,
then I'd rather not go down that road. The language could handle most of
this for us, but those features would unnecessarily slow down the language
by default, just by needing to handle the "worst case" senario.
KISS.
Jeff M.
--
massung-gmail.com
On 3/12/06, Jeff Massung <massung-gmail.com> wrote:
[9/20] from: greggirwin::mindspring::com at: 12-Mar-2006 10:23
Hi Jeff,
JM> I agree. REBOL, interestingly enough, is the first language I use where I
JM> don't feel a compelling need for syntax highlighting or some uber-IDE to
JM> program in. The desktop and console work just fine.
I came to REBOL from VB, and many MS BASICs before that, all of which
are IDE based. I think the IDE thing has been part of why other
languages haven't grabbed me, but with REBOL, I'm OK. That said, I
think some higher level "environments" will be very nice for building
larger projects, and domain-specific tools will be even better.
JM> I think multi-threading would be nice, but it doesn't need to be
JM> over-the-top. Just a way to execute a block in another thread, and
JM> return a thread handle. Something as simple as:
What about something like tasks in Erlang, or Vats in E? I don't know
what Carl has in mind, but I think there are some workable models out
there.
JM> The one thing I can say I miss from the VID is the ability to right
JM> justify controls, but there's probably a way to do it already that
JM> I'm missing.
There are some resizing and other layout toolkits that can help with
this (assuming you're talking about setting buttons and such against
the right edge of a layout). If you're just talking about right
justifying text, simply use the RIGHT facet for the face.
-- Gregg
[10/20] from: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 12-Mar-2006 22:36
Jeff Massung napsal(a):
...
>Most of what I'd like to see involve little, minute additions to the
>language that, while I could simply write the mezzanine functions myself,
>would be worthy additions. Some kind of MAP function is my big one at the
>moment.
>
...
I may not understand your wish, but e.g.
http://www.fm.vslib.cz/~ladislav/rebol/map.r proves, that it is trivial
to define. If you feel a need to "enforce"/"make standard" one specific
version, then it may be a little problem, but I do not see it as a big
deal. (Why do you think such a "simple" function has to be "official"?)
-L
[11/20] from: nick::guitarz::org at: 12-Mar-2006 13:52
What attracted me to Rebol was that you could just do so many things
immediately, without a long learning curve. The fact that it's not limited in
the same ways as other simple-to-use tools, is what makes it useful beyond the
initial learning curve. We all appreciate that Rebol works easily with
Internet protocols, so many data types, GUIs and graphics, etc. - all
natively.
Those things are neatly wrapped up in the language so that you don't have to
work at a low level, or use an OO approach with lots of libraries and layers -
simple things are done simply
. The main thing I'm hoping is for that trend
to continue - for RT to continue to wrap up more things that _have_ to be done
at a low level at this point, using the OS directly or some other development
tool. Keep the language interface straightforward, consistent, and
useful. Make the current version work across more modern platforms and
keep the
distribution as small as possible - that's what attracted us all to Rebol in
the first place, and what keeps us devoted to it. It's powerful now. I don't
think we need any new paradigms, just new native abililities. If something is
_not possible_ in Rebol at this point _without accessing native OS
calls_, then
those are the things that I hope are added. Most of those things are
related to
hardware control: better multiplatform support for sound, CD music, maybe a
simple native multiplatform interface to webcams, etc. Those are things I
could really use, and which would make Rebol ultimately useful. Anything that
can be implemented in Rebol - as it exists - doesn't need to be added
by RT. Protocol extensions can be the responsibility of the community.
Everyone has
different needs and desires, and it's clear that Rebol can't stay small if
everyone's wish is granted. Doc Kimbel's MySQL interface, Gabriele Santilli's
PDF dialect, Christian Ensel's menu system, Andrew Hoadley's 3d engine, Oldes'
flash dialect, etc. are so useful, but those things don't need to be part of
the interpreter. Clearly, they were added as third party creations. If it's
possible to implement common video codecs in Rebol as it exists, for example,
then that can be the responsibility of the community. If it's not _possible_
to implement a video codec in Rebol, then we need native tools in Rebol
to make
it possible. Speed up the things that need to be sped up, provide
access to the
hardware in a way that makes it possible, etc. If RT wants to provide
that sort
of thing modularly, that's great, but not at the expense of a small minimum
distribution (of course, those who are happy with 1.3 could just continue to
use 1.3...).
Beyond that, I hope RT really works at marketing. A bigger community means a
more productive and capable language via more third party tools. That's where
Rebol's really lacking. No one uses it. Carl and many of the Rebol gurus are
design geniuses - my sense is that they should devote more of their energy and
vision to promoting the superior design of Rebol, and making it commercially
acceptable to use it! Success in that area would be success for everyone
involved :)
We use language as an interface to the machine's hardware and OS.
Rebol lets us
control many of those things natively, with a language design that's
brilliant. RT implemented GUI and graphics beautifully. They added
things like serial I/O
natively. We need more native abilities like those - anything that has to be
done directly with the OS and/or some other tool. I don't see anything wrong
with the language design - I only see a few capabilities missing - continuing
the trend so that Rebol isn't incapable in certain areas will attract more
people to use Rebol, and will continue to make it more productive for all of
us.
Quoting Giuseppe Chillemi <gchillemi-aliceposta.it>:
[12/20] from: gabriele::colellachiara::com at: 12-Mar-2006 23:56
Hi Jeff,
On Sunday, March 12, 2006, 4:44:59 PM, you wrote:
JM> Something I forgot to mention, though, about multi-threading. This is
JM> potentially a gigantic can of worms to open. If we suddenly had to start
JM> worrying about critical sections, mutexes, locking global variables, etc,
JM> then I'd rather not go down that road. The language could handle most of
JM> this for us, but those features would unnecessarily slow down the language
JM> by default, just by needing to handle the "worst case" senario.
Our plan is indeed to add multitasking, not multithreading. That
is, no (as far as possible) shared data; communication via a port
(if possible, without copy, so that it is very fast). We don't yet
know what the compromises will be - but we don't want
synchronization headaches in REBOL.
Easy rule: if it's not simple, it's not REBOL. ;)
Regards,
Gabriele.
--
Gabriele Santilli <gabriele-rebol.com> --- http://www.rebol.com/
Colella Chiara software division --- http://www.colellachiara.com/
[13/20] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 13-Mar-2006 22:56
On Sunday, 12-March-2006 at 13:52:45 Nick Antonaccio wrote,
>Beyond that, I hope RT really works at marketing. A bigger community means a
>more productive and capable language via more third party tools. That's
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
>acceptable to use it! Success in that area would be success for everyone
>involved :)
I agree. A re-write of REBOL to add new features would be nice if it's a success, but
I see no reason to suspect it will be, given the amount of unfinished REBOL stuff that's
about. The Mac View version is still "pending" on their website, though in alpha or
beta if you look deeply. And REBOL Services? It's still in alpha or beta too I believe,
as is Rebcode. And the REBOL plugin is still only on IE.
I'm worried that while they're trying to make REBOL perfect, the world's leaving them
far behind.
I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but then I read this from Dave Winer...
http://www.scripting.com/2006/03/13.html#whyIWillStopBlogging
---8<---
When I started blogging, depending on how you look at it, either in 1994, 1996 or 1997,
I had different goals, and happily the goals have been accomplished. Billions of Websites
now no longer seems an outrageously ambitious goal. We're pretty close to a billion,
I suspect. The goal was also to create tools that would make it easy for everyone to
have a site, and then more specifically a chronological one. That's done.
I wanted programming to turn upside down, to have the Internet be the platform instead
of Microsoft and Apple. That worked too. APIs on web apps are now commonplace, and a
basis for comparison between offerings. While user interfaces have gotten better, of
course, there's been a steady flow of new ideas in how my work connects with yours, and
vice versa, and we're doing it without a platform vendor controlling it.
---8<---
That second paragraph's the important one. REBOL should be part of it and would be way
better than the horrible mix of stuff used to put an AJAX site together. It isn't though,
and I don't see how improving the core language will make it so. At the stage it is
now, it needs two (or perhaps three) things done: To have the plugin available for all
major browsers and platforms and for it to be promoted! (The third thing is going fully
open-source, but I'm unsure of just how much difference that would make.)
REBOL's promotion now is all "come to me". "Join AltME" instead of "plug this into your
existing website". Carl has a blog, but there's no public commenting allowed, so no
conversation takes place around it. You can just leave a message, which no one except
those at RT will see. The traffic's all going the wrong way, a black hole instead of
a sun.
Hee, and to prove my point, I've just searched Technorati. Just one REBOL hit in the
last three days, and this is it...
I just killed a couple of days reading Stevey's Drunken Blog Rants, which is a fascinating
account of a talented engineer spending a year searching for better languages, and finding
Lisp in the end. Lots of interesting insights -- I found his essays on practicing programming
and math every day to be particularly inspiring, since I've already found Lisp, and Ruby,
and OCaml, and Erlang, and pretty much all of the other languages that are mentioned.
Except Rebol. That one was new.
And having posted this, how do I link to it on the net if I want to point someone else
to it? Wait until it appears in the mailing-list archive, right? Trouble is, that doesn't
happen instantly - and sometimes not for a day or more. Which is usually after you've
moved on to something else. Which is no way to promote anything.
Umm - rant over. :-)
-- Carl Read.
[14/20] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 14-Mar-2006 0:49
Carl Read wrote:
>On Sunday, 12-March-2006 at 13:52:45 Nick Antonaccio wrote,
>>Beyond that, I hope RT really works at marketing. A bigger community means a
<<quoted lines omitted: 13>>
>I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but then I read this from Dave Winer...
>http://www.scripting.com/2006/03/13.html#whyIWillStopBlogging
And I don't agree at all guys. First - if you would still insist on
original rebol, you would be 10 times or more slower, had some features
which showed as not so important later, respectively speed gains from
different implementation was right. Carl did reimplementation in few
months and we got 2.0 branch. Incompatibilities? So what? It is still
rebol and imo it is normal. Look at Perl 5 to 6 and I don't expect Rebol
to be so much incompatible ...
However - in my opinion there was chosen wrong path for rebol from the
very beginning - it should be async, tasking, multimedia ready from the
very beginning. You know - we've got async for a while, but it showed
not being so much stable. And Carl clearly stated that some things are
not possible without slightly different implementation.
I don't understand you at all - you can get much better lower level
implementation and you are scared? those things don't necessarily mean
your rebol code will break every 2 lines ;-) It is imo like inserting
rebol language into more powerful underlying framework.
My vote for Rebol 3.0 - definitely - no more compromises ...
-pekr-
[15/20] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 13-Mar-2006 15:18
* Carl Read <carl-cybercraft.co.nz> [060313 13:17]:
This thread seems to have become about restrospection and
expectation. So here's MTCW:
> I agree. A re-write of REBOL to add new features would be nice if
> it's a success, but I see no reason to suspect it will be, given the
> amount of unfinished REBOL stuff that's about.
As in the long-lived binary skip bug... is it still there after
5 or 6 years?
As to retrospection:
-------------------------
I began learning rebol in 2000, after 11 years of C programming, along
with some Assembler and VBA. I also began learning python at the same
time, as my assignment was to provide semester 1 and 2 of a
learn-to-program cirriculum for a now-defunct online high school.
I choose for the first semester rebol because
1)I had heard of it 'cuz my niece was working for RT at the time.
2)I like the easy help mechanism and absense of system calls for
first-times
I choose python for the second semester for
1)it's higher level of discipline
2)and greater level of usage.
Since that time I've programmed about equally in rebol and in python,
and I feel that each inform the other. I think that rebol is
about 50% more efficient than python, line-for-line, but I have also
found that python scales better and is easier for me to maintain.
Python has more features available from the download community, but
rebol is growing in leaps and bounds thanks to rebol.org, which in my
opinion is one of the great redemptions of this PL.
Further redemptions:
I use Andrew Martin's html dialect along with Doc Kimbel's mysql
protocol, they are my bread-and-butter and are *far* more efficient to
use than comparable python resources.
On the other hand, there are many features in python that I like, but
many of them can be emulated by rebol (like built-in special methods
and selective error handling ) and the concept of
enforcing *rules* with rebol -
as opposed to python's strict engineering syntax,
can make rebol more scalable. This should be explored more, methinks.
But here's the kicker:
the Expectation part:
> The Mac View version
> is still "pending" on their website, though in alpha or beta if you
> look deeply. And REBOL Services? It's still in alpha or beta too I
> believe, as is Rebcode. And the REBOL plugin is still only on IE.
I've now become reticient about starting any more large project in
rebol, the expectation that I had when I began with rebol - that it
would rapidly catch on with the growth of the internet - has not been
realized, so far as I can tell.
Currently, three websites that I have worked on, that have been built
partially in rebol, are now for sale. I worry that an "obscure"
language as a component may lessen the appeal for sale. On the other
hand, if they are sold and someone else starts to maintain them, will
it introduce rebol further to the programming community. I just don't
know what to expect. Unfortunately, I think that rebol remains
"obscure."
I think that having rebol plugins available for Netscape, Mozilla and
Firefox could greatly promote rebol. Being able to code in rebol to
create dhtml effects and communicate with servers without page
refreshing, would be far more appealable than javascript IMHO.
> I'm worried that while they're trying to make REBOL perfect, the world's leaving them
far behind.
For my part, most of my current work has code used by and delivered to
the client written in python and javascript with rebol working in the
background, doing things like code generation and utilities, with rebol
code not being delivered, but doing much of the heavy lifting.
Using rebol got me interested in lisp. Here's an example of a "new"
language that may catch on and may pass rebol by:
newlisp - www.newlisp.org
Why? Because it is a lisp-like language, easy to pick up by a CL
programmer but also easy to pick up by a non-CL programmer because the
syntax is simpler than that of Common Lisp. And the syntax is well-
known, but with modern features targeting internet usage. IOWS, if a
site were built in newlisp, programmers would be easier for the new
owner to find.
I wish rebol the best of luck, it's an absolute pleasure to code in, but
I share Carl's worry about it being left behind.
In my opinion:
-------------------------------------------------
- Working plugins for all browsers could really -
- save rebol from obscurity. -
-------------------------------------------------
MTCW, rant and all:
tim
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[16/20] from: carl:cybercraft at: 14-Mar-2006 7:01
On Tuesday, 14-March-2006 at 0:49:03 Petr Krenzelok wrote,
>I don't understand you at all - you can get much better lower level
>implementation and you are scared? those things don't necessarily mean
>your rebol code will break every 2 lines ;-) It is imo like inserting
>rebol language into more powerful underlying framework.
I'm not scared by any minor inconsistencies with previous versions, but that we'll just
enter another wait and see mode. I'm not talking about the language, but its promotion.
There's zero buzz about REBOL, despite it being useful enough now.
There's no point in writing something for the plugin when it won't work on any browser
other than IE or any OS other than Windows, but at least it's very good for CGI work.
This doesn't seem to be known about though, as hosting services that actively support
REBOL are next to non-existant. You'll get PHP, perl, python, Ruby on Rails and so on,
but no REBOL. Compare the results of a search for "ruby on rails hosting" to one for
"rebol hosting", then ask yourself, which has been around the longer, Ruby on Rails or
REBOL?
If we'd managed to get hosting companies interested in supporting REBOL it might've been
more popular now, but we didn't, and I think that window of opportunity is now gone.
The buzz now is for online, in-browser apps, with the leading contender for dominance
being AJAX. (Which just uses a bunch of existing tech.) The REBOL plugin could be a
contender in that space, if only it was on all the popular browsers.
Why will the proposed new features of REBOL 3 bring in more users? What will be its
market?
-- Carl.
[17/20] from: Paavo:Nevalainen:saunalahti:fi at: 14-Mar-2006 9:11
At 07:02 AM 3/14/2006, Carl Read wrote:
>The buzz now is for online, in-browser apps, with the leading
>contender for dominance being AJAX. (Which just uses a bunch of
>existing tech.) The REBOL plugin could be a contender in that
>space, if only it was on all the popular browsers.
I guess getting new plug-ins is quite a heavy process. Would like to
see more plug-ins, though.
Paavo N.
[18/20] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 14-Mar-2006 10:37
> If we'd managed to get hosting companies interested in supporting REBOL it might've
been more popular now, but we didn't, and I think that window of opportunity is now gone.
>
If windows of opportunities is gone according to you, then why to be
afraid of some changes? RT can only surpirse us, no? :-)
> The buzz now is for online, in-browser apps, with the leading contender for dominance
being AJAX. (Which just uses a bunch of existing tech.) The REBOL plugin could be a
contender in that space, if only it was on all the popular browsers.
>
> Why will the proposed new features of REBOL 3 bring in more users? What will be its
market?
>
What is its current market? Look - it is clear now, that Rebol 3 will
support some module/component architecture and that some of its parts
will even be open-sourced. That may speed-up some things and get us
rebol deployed into more real-life end-solutions. What is wrong with
my-task: make task! [some-code-here]? It could as well be just called
Core 2.8, but the changes will be so big, that it deserves to be called
3.0. That is of course my speculation, but from what was told during the
last few years, Rebol 3.0 will give us features we wanted for the long
time already!
And guys - who spreads the View OS-X non being available? From last I
heard, even if beta, it seems being stable enough, that e.g. Carl uses
AtlME on OS-X machine IIRC. Well, of course there are some things
unfinished, but if RT is focused, why to be scared of wait-and-see mode?
Core 2.0 was brought in 6 or so months? Or even less? Don't forget
please, that Rebol as a language is already here. We are mostly talking
new framework it is being deployed into. Tasking, probably new event
system, open interface to language extensibility, rewritten View, ready
for plug-ins etc etc.
I think we should wait for Carl to tell us more technical details, but
from what I heard, there will be more than one dedicated coder working
on Rebol 3.0 full-time ;-) I hope it is not just noise but actually
truth .... and if so, I expect first beta to be awailable at the end of
the year, and it is imo the pessimistic variant! And if Rebol 3.0
underlying architecture opens rebol for the community to help with some
open sourced components, if it allows better async, tasking behavior,
new things, which are not even easily possible now, will come! And if
so, it is imo worth it.
As for browser plug-ins - just give me ONE C coder with a bit of free
time. I gathered MOST of the info into plug-ins Altme group, and I can
repost it here (maybe I even did, do not remember now), about how to get
NS compatible plug-in implemented. It would cover Mozilla/FF, Netscape,
Opera at least. And it is imo not more than wrapping some 20 - 30 funcs
at max. It can be done, but RT wanted us to help here. It is us who was
not able to do it yet ...
-pekr-
[19/20] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 14-Mar-2006 10:41
* Carl Read <carl-cybercraft.co.nz> [060313 20:05]:
> I'm not scared by any minor inconsistencies with previous versions,
> but that we'll just enter another wait and see mode. I'm not talking
> about the language, but its promotion. There's zero buzz about REBOL,
> despite it being useful enough now.
Hugely useful. It runs rings around python!
See my previous post.
Sell "freedom". Rebol is the most adaptable language that I have
ever found and that can be very appealing to programmers who like
freedom.
> There's no point in writing something for the plugin when it won't
> work on any browser other than IE or any OS other than Windows, but at
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
> If we'd managed to get hosting companies interested in supporting
> REBOL it might've been more popular now, but we didn't, and I think
Rebol's advantage is that it is very easy for a sysadmin to install.
It is like the "sqlite" of languages.
and BTW: I think sqlite and rebol are potentially a very good fit for
small projects. I haven't yet tried btn-sqlite, but plan to soon.
> that window of opportunity is now gone.
Nah! Always will be new technology and the opportunity to "open"
a "new window".
> The buzz now is for online, in-browser apps, with the leading
> contender for dominance being AJAX. (Which just uses a bunch of
> existing tech.) The REBOL plugin could be a contender in that space,
> if only it was on all the popular browsers.
Bingo! (see above).
> Why will the proposed new features of REBOL 3 bring in more users? What will be its
market?
Good point.
tim
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[20/20] from: charles:mougel:spinodo at: 14-Mar-2006 21:00
Tim Johnson a =E9crit :
>>The buzz now is for online, in-browser apps, with the leading
>>contender for dominance being AJAX. (Which just uses a bunch of
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
>>
>Bingo! (see above).
I'm really agree with that.
VID is cool, for layout description.
But, a dialect for web-apps in "AJAX", for rebol in cgi will be a good
thing.
A webpage, rebol-generated or not, and call to a server-deamon, written
in rebol.
A dialect for describing web-dynamic-interface, as easy as in VID !
Here is what I dream now.
Charles.
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted