Rebol Player Wish list
[1/7] from: garymiller::starband::net at: 17-Jul-2002 14:36
Has there every been any talk of releasing the Rebol language as an embedded API. If the interpreter was callable as a library from your program, you could do a slick user interface another language such as VB.Net and call Rebol passing it a script or a do %filename command. I like Rebol from the standpoint that I can do some very powerful things in little code, but is the View portion really up to doing commercial quality look and feel applications without a lot of complexity? If the API was developed in MONO the OpenSource .Net clone, it would still be cross-platform to many environments. The API would then be callable from any Microsoft .Net language VB.Net, C#, J#, C++, and also be callable from any code developed with the MONO project OpenSource compiler. As it stands now, if I develo and distribute an application with Rebol, I am basicly giving away the source code too, since all the scripts are in readable ASCII test. Even if you wrote a stub that decrypted the rest of the Rebol scripts into memory you'd have still to create the startup stub in plaintext and from there anybody could still get to the decryption key and encrypted scripts. Or maybe even a Rebol compiler which produced a binary file that could not be modified. To attract commercial developers some method of protecting code and algorithms seems to be necessary. _____________________________________ Think you can't get high-speed Internet? Now you can! StarBand offers high-speed Internet via satellite. No phone lines needed. New lower prices. For all 50 U.S. States. See for yourself at: http://www.StarBand.com
[2/7] from: ammon:rcslv at: 17-Jul-2002 6:41
Hi, I don't work for REBOL, but there is a serious little project going on right now to enhance View. From what I have seen and IMHO you should be able to do comercial quality apps with REBOL/View 3.0 which, I believe, is close to release. There have already been betas released, but they didn't include the enhanced version of View which will really just be an enhanced VID dialect. As far as compiling, that IS available. You just need to contact RT for details. HTH Ammon A short time ago, Miller Gary, sent an email stating:
[3/7] from: dada:gecko:verizon at: 17-Jul-2002 16:15
> If the API was developed in MONO the OpenSource .Net clone, > it would still be cross-platform to many environments. The > API would then be callable from any Microsoft .Net language > VB.Net, C#, J#, C++, and also be callable from any code > developed with the MONO project OpenSource compiler.
I think REBOL should stay away from mixing with proprietary languages. REBOL is essentially a communications language/OS and communications run on standards. Ensuring that REBOL complies with open standards, ensures that at some point someone -- perhaps you -- could add API that call your M$ projects, but leave the rest of us content to use REBOL on platforms that may not support the musical scale that is current M$ technology.
> To attract commercial developers some method of protecting > code and algorithms seems to be necessary.
Not necessarily. Though REBOL isn't open source (yet, anyhow), it remains a language and community that seems to very much follow some of the ideals of the open source community. Overall, I balk at using any kind of proprietary language. When one coroporation controls the distribution and use of a language, they control a lot (which is why I wish REBOL would go open source). Imagine if English could only be spoken at a location that the creators of the language determined. The point of networking and global communications and all that is to ensure that humans have a means of communicating with one another, no matter what. A great big digital tower of Babel, kind of. REBOL is great in this regard, as it's simple to use and allows many people on many o/s to use it. Not to mention the line it walks between langauge and operating system. If REBOL embraces an M$ technology, chances are M$ will do what they can to keep REBOL from embracing other technologies (Java, Python, Perl, PHP, RealBasic, etc) and all we'll have is an M$ clone that can be destroyed by the powers-that-be. Sure M$ has its place, but it may just be time to kill the buzzwords and give programming back to the people who have fun with. >:) Rebolution! sd -- --------------------------------- : sabin densmore : www.onegecko.com : [sabin--onegecko--com]
[4/7] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 18-Jul-2002 7:05
Ammon Johnson wrote:
>Hi, > I don't work for REBOL, but there is a serious little project going on right
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>> As far as compiling, that IS available. You just need to contact RT for >details.
Hmm, Hi Ammon and others. I am not sure we talk of the same project, but few of us put significant effort into organising VID 1.3. It should be just minor update - provide new much needed styles as tree-view, tabs, better list style and system-wise we are trying to address issues like skins-system, focus issues, drag-drop and resizing. I am not sure which of above features will make it into View 1.3 though ... As far as compiling is concerned - I would still prefer ability to compile at least portions of math, bitmap operations etc., 'cause we are slow here ... -pekr-
[5/7] from: ammon:rcslv at: 18-Jul-2002 3:16
Hi, That is the project I was refering to, and thanks for the update! ;-) What would be the possibilities of getting a menu style into VID 1.3? Carl did say that he liked the idea of being able to compile a function directly from REBOL something like:
>> my-func: compile func [x] [x * .0193882] >>
Which would make my-func a native value. The only catch here is that Carl didn't say when or IF they would impliment it, only that he liked it. ;-) Enjoy!! Ammon A short time ago, Petr Krenzelok, sent an email stating:
[6/7] from: carl:cybercraft at: 19-Jul-2002 11:10
On 18-Jul-02, Ammon Johnson wrote:
> Carl did say that he liked the idea of being able to compile a > function directly from REBOL something like:
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>> that Carl didn't say when or IF they would impliment it, only that > he liked it. ;-)
And this Carl likes the idea too. (; Ammon, you mentioned a couple of posts back that REBOL can be compiled. "You just need to contact RT for details." Do you mean Encap, or is there true compiling now? I assume the former, as I can't imagine how you can compile a script where every word within it can be both data and code. -- Carl Read
[7/7] from: ammon:rcslv at: 19-Jul-2002 1:36
Hi, Refering to Encap, which is now refered to as Royalty. From what I gathered from the question they (whoever asked) mostly wants the ability to protect his code, Royalty offers that ability. If they were wanting the speed of compiled code, he will have to be patient for RT to produce the compile function. ;-) Enjoy!! Ammon A short time ago, Carl Read, sent an email stating:
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted