[REBOL] Compiler for Rebol ? Re:(2)
From: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 24-Sep-2000 0:50
> For stand-alone, shrink-wrapped client use, like RebMail, a email client,
or
> similar programs, I can imagine that a future Rebol product would a
> Rebol/View or Rebol/Core that can be packaged with a number of encrypted
> scripts into one executable binary. That seems fairly obvious to me. I've
> also CC-ed this to [feedback--rebol--com] just in case the Rebol crew haven't
> thought of it yet.
I think some ideas were expressed for many times here on ml. I also think RT
thought about it already, the question is if they will regard it being
priority. Let's face it:
Some time ago Carl mentioned something about partial compilation of certain
expression. Just few weeks ago he thowed here one email stating something
like why don't you guys use 'compile? Hey ;-) With no further explanation
following, one can only guys Carl is somethin cooking on his notebook, or I
just misuderstood the issue.
Elan, in one of his last posts (as reaction to my email of disappointment),
talked about slim binaries. If I am not wrong, slim binaries are kind of
multiplatform binaries. New Amiga OS will have the same advantage. Once app
will be in VP code, you can transfer the file between platforms. I don't
know how efficient the solution could be with interpreted language, if it
would be some kind of byte code or what, but could be interesting ...
Then there is a possibility of REBOL runtime. Well, that's something I would
like to see as the last option. Why? Because this way RT has to maintain
another family of REBOL versions, limiting the language.
I would like to see freedom of expression. E.g., some scripts (modules) in
compiled form (slim "binary", byte-p-code, whatever), while end user ability
to influence some of the other scripts (modules) ...
Some one or two years ago, there was also talk about so called
REBOL/Toolkit - REBOL in the form of libraries, embeddable into another
language apps ...
Cheers,
-pekr-
