Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

Personal Programming and Rebol Promotion

 [1/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 16-Dec-2007 13:21


Hello Everyone, I've been actively watching the Rebol community for several years, but generally keeping my mouth shut for the most part (except for writing the tutorials at http://musiclessonz.com/rebol_tutorial.html and http://musiclessonz.com/rebol.html). I'm not a Rebol guru, but I do use it regularly, and rely on it for critical computing activities in my life. All of my daily business operations rely on Rebol scripts (and several significant apps) that I've written over the years. Rebol has repeatedly satisfied all of my needs, and I wrote my tutorials a few years ago because Rebol had a enormous positive impact on my productivity, and I wanted to share the possibilities I'd discovered with others who were potentially in my situation. I've never considered myself a really knowledgeable coder, even though I've been involved with computers personally for almost 3 decades and worked in the industry for 8 years (mostly in IT service, I owned several retail stores, and did some successful work in the web development industry in the late 90's). I make my living in the music industry, but still use Rebol regularly. To me, it seems obvious that Rebol's greatest strengths are perfectly suited to people like me. It's a uniquely productive and useful tool for those who aren't programmers , and I feel a strong need to communicate my perspective and positive hopes to this group, and to RT. It's been bothering me for years :) I learned C-64 assembler as a pre-teen, studied Lisp and C in college, completed commercial work in VB, PHP, PERL, etc... Some of the code I wrote 10 years ago still plays a critical role in the significant daily commercial operations of a company for whom I developed software solutions. But even with that, I never considered myself a real programmer . I mostly write scripts to satisfy my own personal and professional needs, to help me stay organized, and to manage daily operations in my music instruction business, and on my web sites. For my needs, I LOVE Rebol. It serves as my desktop development solution, as the scripting language for my online needs, and I even use it to manage data on my new Pocket PC (Windows Mobile) phone. It seems to me that the benefit of Rebol's strengths have been missed or misunderstood by the world - even by Carl and RT. Rebol's strengths lie in its simplicity, right? I keep coming back to it again and again because it's just so freakin' easy to use and so productive. I'm frankly stumped by why that point isn't at the heart of every marketing message from RT, and a basis for use among this community. It seems instead that Rebol has tried to best other competing development environments... I've been watching the mailing list, Carl's blog, and other Rebol channels for a number of months, fully aware of the sense that Rebol has reached some sort of "dying" point - a point at which it seems obvious that our community has basically been left behind by the mainstream industry. I guess that must have to do with the upcoming release of R3 - it's easier for everyone to think of R2 as past history, and to consider the idea of having newer, better things to look forward to. But I've been watching for years, thinking that Rebol is missing it's niche - a niche for which it's already PERFECT. A niche for which it seems to have been created, but to which it doesn't seem to have been targeted in terms of marketing and promotion, even in the most basic way... To me it seems that Rebol is the perfect language for use by "common man". Not for developers, but for average computer users who want to use their computers for personal needs. People buy commercial applications to suit their needs - operating systems, web browsers, financial management packages, and such software products do their main computing work. Most average people will never consider writing a browser application from scratch - that's pointless. But everyone - everyone - would like to have more control of their own digital world. Computing devices have taken on a central role in the lives of most humans. To understand and be able to do simple personalized things with those devices, to be able to create little apps and scripts for desktop machines, web sites, phones, etc. that are personally useful - that's an interest I see in people all around me. There are numerous scripting languages and development environments which enable that possibility, but NONE that are as EASY and as VERSATILE as Rebol. That's Rebol's strength. It's easy enough for AVERAGE PEOPLE to learn and use productively, right away. As it exists right now, in R2, there's nothing else I've found that holds a candle to it in terms of combining ease and SCOPE of use. That's why I love it. Rebol's not perfectly suited to every development need - nothing is - but it's easy to use and it works to satisfy so much of the scope of common use that average people may experience. It seems to me that RT and this community have always been focused on making Rebol more perfect and acceptable to other developers. I don't see that happening, and I think it misses the boat anyway. From my perspective, it seems so clear that Rebol should be presented to a much larger group of AVERAGE computer users. To enable a simple solution for computing among the masses. Rebol may not ever compete with the likes of Python and other scripting languages whose designs are made to satisfy the existing expectations of the professional programming crowd. There will always be shifts and trends in the commercial development arena, based on the need to stay in line with the most popular design trends. Rebol may not be in line with those trends, but it embodies something much more useful to average users: a dialecting design that makes simple work of complex tasks. To me, it makes sense that this is the key for average computer users. Immediately accessible power, with a simplicity that's unmatched anywhere else. That's Rebol's niche. That may not appeal to professional "programmers" who are entrenched in mainstream trends and group work requirements, but I believe there is a much bigger community of "normal" people who want something more natural in terms of controlling their computers, which I really believe is what Rebol provides. I believe that there is an enormous community of people who don't know that something like Rebol even exists, let alone that they might want or need it. Most people have the sense that coding of any sort is just something they'd never want to touch. It seems to me that Rebol was designed to speak to those people, and not just to provide some sort of easy teaching language experience, but to actually scale into productive use. It seems to me that perfecting that scalability has maybe become the focus of RT, and is certainly an interest of professionals among this community. But to me, it seems blindingly obvious that if we want a bigger community, and a healthy Rebol future, we should be focused on evangelizing to average users, so they can see the light and the potential personal benefits of this fantastically versatile little computing tool. I think it's possible to attract an enormous crowd of average people - regular computer users - for whom Rebol can actually make a significant difference in life. For those people, current and historical language trends don't matter at all, and Rebol is already great as it exists in its current state. I've recently been making videos of my absolute beginners tutorial, just to walk people through the text in a way that's more likely to be accessed, on YouTube. The videos are very quickly improvised, they're not at all well produced, and not very well spoken (lot's of "um"s and ah s), but they're the kind of thing I would've loved to have had when I was learning Rebol (I really enjoyed watching video presentations from previous years of Devcon - watching video is just more fun and accessible than reading text). So far, I've uploaded 62 videos, about 8 hours of clips. Those 8 hours provide a real intro to Rebol for average people, and they're getting watched (with probably more realistic, interested views from people in the outside world than the web site has received). I'd love to see a realization occur among this community, and at RT, that there's still some absolutely enormous potential for Rebol. I think Rebol has a phenomenally useful niche among the biggest crowd of computer users around the world - average people. I think it's even conceivable that Rebol could potentially become a popular mainstream application among average users, just because it's so astoundingly useful, and so dramatically simple to use. If promotional efforts were made to open peoples' eyes simply to its existence, and to the potential it enables in the experience of the average computer user, I think Rebol could be the outstanding success it deserves to be. I'm going to continue to do what I can, and hope that others, especially RT, may see Rebol's potential for use among average users, from THEIR perspective, and put the necessary energy into promoting with that perspective in mind. We all know Rebol is great, and I think there are many, many other people who may not have ever considered even looking at a "programming language" who may think it's great too, if they just knew that it existed, and understood what they could do if they looked into it. My 2 cents is that the efforts of RT and this community shouldn't be focused on appealing to existing programmers, but rather to exposing the idea and the potential of personal programming to average users. I hope this doesn't come off as some wackadoo rambling post - I'd just love to see the Rebol community grow, and become useful to others, the way it's been useful to me :) I see the idea of exposing Rebol to the mainstream user crowd, and promoting the idea of personal programming with Rebol (with the same flair that Apple presents MAC as a sleek solution, for example), as a plausible path to creating significant success for Rebol. I have some more specific ideas, if anyone's interested...

 [2/53] from: edoconnor:gmai:l at: 16-Dec-2007 18:48


Thanks for your perspective, Nick. It is tempting to believe that "average" computer users are pretty similar to ourselves, and that the feeling of empowerment from writing scripts in a code editor or composing expressions on the command line of a shell/interpreter would not be a foreign concept. But I'm fairly certain that to the "average" user, this activity is regarded as unfathomable geekery or voodoo. I wish it weren't so. In any case, I'm 100% with you in that people who love Rebol should continue to embrace and use it, and hopefully we'll see more interest as enthusiasts continue to spread the word. Ed On Dec 16, 2007 4:21 PM, Nick Antonaccio wrote:

 [3/53] from: carl:cybercraft at: 17-Dec-2007 5:11


On Sunday, 16-December-2007 at 13:21:42 Nick Antonaccio wrote,
>I've been watching the mailing list, Carl's blog, and other Rebol >channels for a number of months, fully aware of the sense that Rebol
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>history, and to consider the idea of having newer, better things to >look forward to.
I've been having similar thoughts of a general nature regarding software. Why do software companies insist on trying to make the older versions of their software obsolete when they introduce a more advanced version? I'm not saying they should continue to develope the old software, but just declare it feature-complete with support consisting of the basics - such as bug-fixes. I mean, what's wrong with having more than one product? Does Colgate only sell one brand of toothpaste? Such an attitude in a business would I'm sure pay off in the long term, as users would know that while the company's in existance they'll continue to get support for any of the software they buy.
>To me it seems that Rebol is the perfect language for use by "common >man". Not for developers, but for average computer users who want to
<<quoted lines omitted: 13>>
>That's Rebol's strength. It's easy enough for AVERAGE PEOPLE to learn >and use productively, right away.
Is that just your opinion, or have you watched 'average people' pick it up and use it? I certainly have faith enough in the average person being able to, assuming they wanted to. I've seen it happen twice in the computer world. Once with the 8-bit computers, which nearly all came with BASIC and which people were encouraged to learn. (All the computer magazines of the day including listings of various lengths and complexity.) And then with the Web and HTML. Only a markup language of course, but useful and empowering and a gateway into real programming for those who wanted to go further. -- Carl Read.

 [4/53] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 17-Dec-2007 5:11


On Sunday, 16-December-2007 at 18:48:55 Ed O'Connor wrote,
>Thanks for your perspective, Nick. >It is tempting to believe that "average" computer users are pretty
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
>certain that to the "average" user, this activity is regarded as >unfathomable geekery or voodoo.
Yes and no. For those whose response to "You can use CTRL X, C and V to cut, copy and paste" is "I could never remember that!", then yes. But for those who don't mind spending a day or two learning something new that'll be useful for themselves, then no, or at least maybe not. There's problems with REBOL for this though, starting with "How do you save a jpeg?" -- Carl Read.

 [5/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 17-Dec-2007 10:28


Hello Nick, what a long email :-) I would like to adress shortly some of your points. I fully agree, that one of the strengths of REBOL is - simplicity. As for overall marketing message, I held some discussion with small team of interested ppl, and I think that RT knows, where they want to go, and how to best communicate it in the future. That should come with R3, and we will be facing websites redesign etc etc. I think that main point is not to play catch-up on other languages, but to even further excell in what is REBOL good in. As for simplicity, I think that we need small cookbook examples, and the best method is to present them visually. That is why I still consider web-browser plug-in being rather strategic solution. Users will be able to see the result. We should imo also sell dialecting better. Your method of video tutorial is also very good and you should know, that there was some effort on REBOL3 AltME world to come up with some standard of how to aproach this topic. As for me, I want to use REBOL for our kiosk/advertising system, and as we can build even some nice electronics, I can imagine REBOL driving small systems around in my house. I think REBOL would excell here with simple tools, enabling scripting via dialecting. We will see :-) As for R3 - no worry here. It takes some time, but it is being designed with many thoughts to each single details. And as R3 opens many new possibilities, the consequences of some even small decisions might influence some other places. However, I think that Carl surely wants R3 to still stay rebolish, following simplicity principles. Thanks for your ideas, Cheers, Petr

 [6/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 17-Dec-2007 10:58


Carl Read napsal(a):
> I've been having similar thoughts of a general nature regarding software. Why do software companies insist on trying to make the older versions of their software obsolete when they introduce a more advanced version? > > I'm not saying they should continue to develope the old software, but just declare it feature-complete with support consisting of the basics - such as bug-fixes. I mean, what's wrong with having more than one product? Does Colgate only sell one brand of toothpaste? Such an attitude in a business would I'm sure pay off in the long term, as users would know that while the company's in existance they'll continue to get support for any of the software they buy. >
IIRC there is 2.7.6 release planned, and there was something like last call for bugfixes two or so weeks ago .... Petr

 [7/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 17-Dec-2007 11:00


Carl Read napsal(a):
> Yes and no. For those whose response to "You can use CTRL X, C and V > to cut, copy and paste" is "I could never remember that!", then yes. > But for those who don't mind spending a day or two learning something > new that'll be useful for themselves, then no, or at least maybe not. > There's problems with REBOL for this though, starting with "How do you > save a jpeg?"
Ask, and you will get your answer on this ml or AltME shortly, no? :-) You save png and call xnivew xconvert.exe, or you use Image magic or other toolkit? Simply put - use what is available till R3 comes, which will introduce codes (media loaders/savers). Petr

 [8/53] from: carl:cybercraft at: 17-Dec-2007 13:13


On Monday, 17-December-2007 at 11:00:33 Petr Krenzelok wrote,
>Carl Read napsal(a): >> Yes and no. For those whose response to "You can use CTRL X, C and V
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
>other toolkit? Simply put - use what is available till R3 comes, which >will introduce codes (media loaders/savers).
That was (indirectly) in response to Nick's suggestion of R2 being a good tool for the 'average person'. I'd say JPEG saving and the lack of text-formatting might attract their biggest complaints. -- Carl Read.

 [9/53] from: edoconnor:gm:ail at: 17-Dec-2007 9:35


It's all relative, I guess. Frankly, if you use the acronym JPEG on a regular basis and know what you're talking about, then I'd say you're probably already an above-average computer user. And if you use the term EXIF...

 [10/53] from: fergus4:bellatlantic at: 17-Dec-2007 12:27


Nick, I love your tutorial. As much as I liked rebol before I read it your tutorial opened my eyes to possibilities I did not know were possible with rebol. It's also the perfect evangelist tool because it lays out very clearly what someone can do and how easy it is. I gave a copy to a co-worker at the firehouse that was a few years into a programming degree before he became a fireman. He wants to get back into it but I think learning "C" or c+ was a bit boring to him. He wanted to work with GUI's but none of the study approached this topic. He, like me, likes the idea of building gui rich, useful tools without all the complication attached to them generally. I'm no programmer either but I have built small apps with rebol that are very useful and more importantly small, simple and concise; meaning, they are not these bloated do everything tools. In fact, creating useful apps is so easy and quick with rebol I thought that a company building custom applications for small businesses could be profitable. To be able to create an application that exactly matches what the client wants would not be possible to do with traditional languages without it being prohibitively expensive and out of the price range of a small business that I think can be targeted with rebol. ----------------- Nick, when you mentioned: "I even use it to manage data on my new Pocket PC (Windows Mobile) phone." Did you mean running Core on the phone itself or manipulating data on the PC to late be synced with ActiveSync? Alan Macleod

 [11/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 17-Dec-2007 9:54


Hi Carl, For a year or so, I really talked alot about Rebol with friends and students while I was writing the tutorials, and was able to introduce it to a number of people. I have watched several teenagers, college students, and adults pick up Rebol and accomplish significant goals with it. That's actually the reason for my long-winded plea :) One college student had taken a course in Java, and afterward didn't really know enough to do anything practical in that environment. She stopped studying guitar for a while, and took Rebol lessons with me instead, because she had a specific programming goal in mind that she couldn't achieve in Java. We wrote a program together that helped her lay out knitting pattern diagrams. VID was so easy for her to understand and work with, right away. I just helped her with some general concepts, and helped when she ran into stumbling blocks. I've also written a number of little scripts with music students that help organize projects at the shop, and one student runs a web site about duct tape art that uses a Rebol script we created together. One of our teachers is a hobbyist C programmer. He dabbles in it, but is frustrated, and hasn't built many useful apps. He's been curious about all the practical code that runs the shop - I've already introduced Rebol, he's hooked, and I'm working on him next :) Maybe it's just because I've actually tried to draw students' interest personally, and also because I have a lot of organized material to show off right away, but in my experience, the same type of people who are curious about learning html, or who may have been interested in code but never got much past "hello world" in another language, or who've pasted javascript code into a web page - the intellectually curious - those people seem to have an easy time learning Rebol (I consider them "average people" - maybe I should qualify my rant to include only "average people who've demonstrated interest in code, but who haven't discovered satisfying results" :). It doesn't take much of an introduction - I just download and run this little program, type in some functions, and it does something interesting. I show people how to read their email and how to create some simple GUIs. That's easy enough for anyone to "get" right away, and it just takes a few minutes. I introduce functions, blocks, variables, loops, conditional evaluations, data types, and network protocols all in one shot with some short code examples. The intellectual types who've had any other experience with any type of code tend to be curious about the potential, just because it's so simple to do eye-opening things, right away. I demonstrate the mechanics of typing in some simple syntax, and then explain the idea of assigning word labels to data (especially values returned from functions), and they're off and running. People really enjoy creating GUIs, and that gets them intruiged with Rebol quickly. There's hardly any learning curve, and it's fun. In my experience, I've seen many curious young people have fun learning Rebol basics. It's all about the simplicity of implementation, and the quick ramping up toward visual results and insight into conceptual potential. There's no big download or long install process. There's no visually intricate IDE. There's no learning about imported modules or OO concepts before creating GUIs and network programming. The program's tiny, everything's built-in and simple to start with. One-liners really accomplish something tangible and it's easy to see some useful potential, right away. The path towards real insight and satisfying capability is short enough that passing interest and light curiousity yields significant results, right away. That's the difference with Rebol. I show my students how I created the variety of CGI scripts and GUI scripts we use on a daily basis at the shop, and demonstrate how simple they were to create, and they just see it right away as something they can do. That's why I think we have the potential to attract more beginner users than other development environments. I've seen it happen, and I think Rebol's missing out by not connecting with that market in a bigger way... That part is opinion, but it's based on my few experiences :)

 [12/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 17-Dec-2007 10:11


Hi Alan, I'm really glad to hear that the tutorial is helpful :) On my phone, I run the core155.zip version, found at http://rebol.com/platforms-core.html . It's a few years old, but still runs on the phone I just bought. I use the following script to back up all my important scheduling info for the shop, directly to the storage card on the phone. It runs right on my data-connected window mobile phone (and saves me at least an hour a week dealing with scheduling hassles). I have several little scripts on the phone, and a text menu in rebol.r that lets me choose if I want to run any of them, every time I start rebol. I put the link to the Rebol interpreter right in the Start menu on my phone, which provides very quick access to all my little scripts :) Rebol [] change-dir %/Storage Card/data ; this backs up and downloads just my schedule write %schedule_old.txt read %schedule.txt write %schedule.txt read http://www.mywebsite.com/schedule.txt ; this backs up and downloads the schedules of every teacher in teacherlist.txt teachers: load http://mywebsite.com/teacherlist.txt foreach teacher teachers [ folder: first teacher if exists? (to-file rejoin [folder ".txt"]) [ write (to-file rejoin [folder "_old.txt"]) read (to-file rejoin [folder ".txt"]) print rejoin ["Old copy of " folder " backed up."] ] write (to-file rejoin [folder ".txt"]) read (to-url rejoin ["http://www.mywebsite.com/" folder "/schedule.txt"]) print rejoin ["New download of " folder " saved."] ] print "DONE" Quoting Alan <fergus4-bellatlantic.net>:

 [13/53] from: fergus4:bellatlantic at: 17-Dec-2007 13:25


Nick, I just bought a HTC touch with a Qualcomm 7500 Processor. I see core155 is for strong arm. Do you know if there are any versions that will run on my phone. Did you but your phone specifically to run rebol or is it a happy coincidence? Alan Macleod

 [14/53] from: carl:cybercraft at: 17-Dec-2007 21:22


On Monday, 17-December-2007 at 9:54:45 Nick Antonaccio wrote,
>Hi Carl, > >For a year or so, I really talked alot about Rebol with friends and >students while I was writing the tutorials, and was able to introduce >it to a number of people. I have watched several teenagers, college >students, and adults pick up Rebol and accomplish significant goals >with it. That's actually the reason for my long-winded plea :)
[snip of lots of good examples] Ahah - excellent! Petr - you there? That was an email you should bring to Carl's attention, don't you think? (And I also think this post wins my argument with Tim Johnson here... http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-thread.r?m=rmlSQYC while also proving that you don't even need a point-and-click gui-builder. VID's good enough. Any response, Tim?) Many thanks for this post Nick, and all the other REBOL things you're doing. I was beginning to think that 'average people' were doomed to being led around by the nose with regards to modern computing. Nice to know there's still hope! -- Carl Read.

 [15/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 17-Dec-2007 22:28


> Petr - you there? That was an email you should bring to Carl's attention, don't you think? >
yes, done :-) Personal dedication is good aproach. Win one user at a time. But - I really hope R3 helps to even improve the situation - (browser plug-in, new View capabilities, especially VID3) .... -pekr-

 [16/53] from: brian:wisti:gmai:l at: 17-Dec-2007 13:29


On Dec 16, 2007 1:21 PM, Nick Antonaccio <nick1-musiclessonz.com> wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
[ snip ] I think you made some excellent points. I agree that REBOL has a huge potential niche in the world of average computer programmers. Okay, maybe not quite average, since the pastor at my church probably isn't interested in any form of programming code. However, a lot of ordinary people can get a lot of great usefulness out of REBOL with only a little knowledge. I've helped people make task managers, calendars, ledgers, and other useful everyday apps with REBOL and they can't believe how easy it is. Of course, once they dig in a little it turns into serious voodoo, but for those simple little jobs it's great. Oh, and I've turned dozens of people on to the usefulness of the console as a multi-purpose calculator! I agree that we should embrace the utility of REBOL for the proletariat, since most of the Java, Ruby, and Perl developers of the world are already quite comfortable with their current view of programming. It would be fantastic if REBOL replaced VB as the tool of choice for the only slightly geeky folks out there. You've still got the best tutorials out there. I think you're a being overly modest about your contributions. I'll have to check out the videos sometime, too! Kind Regards, Brian Wisti

 [17/53] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 18-Dec-2007 1:22


On Monday, 17-December-2007 at 22:28:17 Petr Krenzelok wrote,
>> Petr - you there? That was an email you should bring to Carl's attention, >don't you think? >> >> >yes, done :-) Personal dedication is good aproach. Win one user at a >time.
It's not so much winning one person at a time, but with getting the word out to the 'average user' who might use it that here's a tool they would be able to use. How do you advertise it to such people?
>But - I really hope R3 helps to even improve the situation - >(browser plug-in, new View capabilities, especially VID3) ....
My only worry is that too much of it will require third-party software to make it useful. Not a problem if the third-party software is written in REBOL, but could be if it requires a typical Windows install. -- Carl Read.

 [18/53] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 17-Dec-2007 12:58


On Monday 17 December 2007, Carl Read wrote:
> (And I also think this post wins my argument with Tim Johnson here... > > http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-thread.r?m=rmlSQYC > > while also proving that you don't even need a point-and-click gui-builder. > VID's good enough. Any response, Tim?)
Carl, I can't recall what the argument was about, but I'm not really a rebol programmer. I'm a programmer who happens to user rebol/core (among other languages), I don't use view and have no intention of ever using it, *unless* there's a multi-language editor written in view/vid, then I might. I would be happy to annoint you winner of the argument if that makes you happy -- I'm used to losing arguments, I lose one to my wife at least once a day.

 [19/53] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 17-Dec-2007 16:06


Excellent post Nick, and some great follow-up messages as well. Like you, I think REBOL can be used by most anyone who has a need, and the interest to learn how to control their computer. I wouldn't say that's the "average user", but it goes beyond "programmers". Heck, I only got into programming because *I* had a need. I also think that we're only about 5% of the way there right now. We need better tools, scriptable apps, and a lot more dialects. I have hope though. -- Gregg

 [20/53] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 17-Dec-2007 14:46


On Monday 17 December 2007, Gregg Irwin wrote:
> I also think that we're only about 5% of the way there right now. We > need better tools, scriptable apps, and a lot more dialects. I have > hope though.
What is also needed is rebol binaries compiled for 64-bit systems. Now. IF RT abandons 64-bit support for rebol 2, it will reflect badly on rebol 3. MTCW Tim

 [21/53] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 17-Dec-2007 17:07


Hi Tim, TJ> What is also needed is rebol binaries compiled for 64-bit systems. TJ> Now. TJ> IF RT abandons 64-bit support for rebol 2, it will reflect badly on TJ> rebol 3. That would be great too. -- Gregg

 [22/53] from: tomc:cs:uoregon at: 17-Dec-2007 16:14


Gregg Irwin wrote:
> Hi Tim, > TJ> What is also needed is rebol binaries compiled for 64-bit systems.
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> That would be great too. > -- Gregg
be still my fluttering heart .... -- ... nice weather eh tomc-cs.uoregon.edu

 [23/53] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 17-Dec-2007 16:48


On Monday 17 December 2007, Gregg Irwin wrote:
> Hi Tim, > > TJ> What is also needed is rebol binaries compiled for 64-bit systems. > TJ> Now. > TJ> IF RT abandons 64-bit support for rebol 2, it will reflect badly on > TJ> rebol 3. > > That would be great too.
And I noted that you were looking for feedback on rebol with xp 64, did you hear from anyone? tim

 [24/53] from: pwawood::gmail::com at: 18-Dec-2007 10:08


Hi Carl
> It's not so much winning one person at a time, but with getting the > word out to the 'average user' who might use it that here's a tool > they would be able to use. How do you advertise it to such people?
I think it's all down to "viral marketing"; spreading the word through existing social networks. That's just what Nick is successfully doing. Hopefully, the virus he is spreading will soon enter a different social network and then another. I think the comparative success of Runtime Revolution in the user programming field is due to it spreading through education networks. Regards Peter

 [25/53] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 17-Dec-2007 23:13


Hi Tim, TJ> And I noted that you were looking for feedback on rebol with xp TJ> 64, did you hear from anyone? Not yet. -- Gregg

 [26/53] from: louisgosselin:accesrail at: 18-Dec-2007 1:38


Hi, We do use it on Windows 2003 Server 64 if this is relevant. I believe XP 64 and Windows 2003 Server 64 share the same kernel. Louis. Gregg Irwin wrote:

 [27/53] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 17-Dec-2007 23:51


LG> We do use it on Windows 2003 Server 64 if this is relevant. I believe XP LG> 64 and Windows 2003 Server 64 share the same kernel. Thanks Louis! That's what I wanted to hear. And, yes, XP x64 is based on Server 2003. -- Gregg

 [28/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 18-Dec-2007 8:05


Carl Read napsal(a):
> On Monday, 17-December-2007 at 22:28:17 Petr Krenzelok wrote, > >> But - I really hope R3 helps to even improve the situation - >> (browser plug-in, new View capabilities, especially VID3) .... >> > > My only worry is that too much of it will require third-party software to make it useful. Not a problem if the third-party software is written in REBOL, but could be if it requires a typical Windows install. > > -- Carl Read. >
Somehow I don't understand what you mean here? What kind of R3 dependency on 3rd party SW do you have in mind? What we will actually get is one executable, that is no different to R2 executable. It is just that under the hood there are features, that open space for much wider capabilies to be brought to REBOL land - simply the thing that was not possible with R2. Don't be afraid - Carl does keep simplicity principles in mind.... Petr

 [29/53] from: carl:cybercraft at: 18-Dec-2007 9:27


On Tuesday, 18-December-2007 at 8:05:52 Petr Krenzelok wrote,
>Carl Read napsal(a): >> On Monday, 17-December-2007 at 22:28:17 Petr Krenzelok wrote,
<<quoted lines omitted: 12>>
>Somehow I don't understand what you mean here? What kind of R3 >dependency on 3rd party SW do you have in mind?
An example from R2 is having to use image-magick or the like to save JPEGs. I assume that specific example won't be an issue with R3, but that's the kind of thing I mean. With REBOL code it won't be a problem, as to include it in a script will just requre a load-thru - assuming the programmer of the outside code has shown a bit more thought than to use zip to archive it! But if it's not REBOL code and needs to be seperately installed, then that's a big issue for a lot of people.
>What we will actually >get is one executable, that is no different to R2 executable. It is just >that under the hood there are features, that open space for much wider >capabilies to be brought to REBOL land - simply the thing that was not >possible with R2. Don't be afraid - Carl does keep simplicity principles >in mind....
As long as there's not less in it than R2, my worries shouldn't be realised. -- Carl Read.

 [30/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 18-Dec-2007 3:40


> I just bought a HTC touch with a Qualcomm 7500 Processor. > I see core155 is for strong arm. Do you know if there are > any versions that will run on my phone.
The HTC touch is built on Windows Mobile 6, and I think most of those new devices support code written fo the Arm family of processors. If any version of Rebol will work for you, that same Arm version for PocketPC should be the one to try...

 [31/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 18-Dec-2007 4:06


Hi Brian, I've always appreciated the link on your site - you've done an amazing job of promoting your pages :) Your site is a real asset to community - it provides significant exposure.
> I'll have to check out the videos sometime, too!
There's nothing new there, but they might be interesting for people who don't want to sit down and read about programming. Now I'm beginning to get concerned about the quality of those videos - they were initially something I did on a whim just to pass some time during the cold season, and to revitalize my participation in Rebol. I never really expected many views (maybe a few friends and already interested eyeballs coming from this list). In a few weeks, there have been over 4000 clicks, and I'm thinking a more organized effort might be worth while...

 [32/53] from: fjouen:free at: 18-Dec-2007 15:15


Hi I've tested core 155 on a S3C2240 processor with windows mobile 5 (an =20 Acer pda) : rebol is perfectly running. Le 18 d=E9c. 07 =E0 12:40, Nick Antonaccio a =E9crit :

 [33/53] from: fjouen:free at: 18-Dec-2007 15:31


Hi again, Core 155 does not run on HTC touch under WM6. Sorry Le 18 d=E9c. 07 =E0 12:40, Nick Antonaccio a =E9crit :

 [34/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 18-Dec-2007 6:38


I'm running it on Verizon's version of the Audiovox 6700 phone. The only issues I've noticed have to do with screen artifacts that appear if I switch between the 6700's portrait and landscape modes. Also, network activities in Rebol don't automatically force a data connection (i.e., I have to connect to the Internet by running IE first). Quoting Fran=E7ois Jouen <fjouen-free.fr>:

 [35/53] from: fjouen::free::fr at: 18-Dec-2007 15:55


hi Nick As far as I remenber when you're changing the orientation of your phone you have to modify the scroll buffer number of lines and the number of terminal chars. See Settings options in rebol menu. Regards Le 18 d=E9c. 07 =E0 15:38, Nick Antonaccio a =E9crit :

 [36/53] from: fergus4:bellatlantic at: 18-Dec-2007 18:12


Excellent! Thanks Alan Macleod

 [37/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 18-Dec-2007 20:02


Thanks Francois! Fran=E7ois Jouen <fjouen-free.fr>:

 [38/53] from: fjouen:free at: 19-Dec-2007 10:56


Hi Nick, Alan and others HTC and PDA users I've found an interesting open source langage which is running on PDA and HTC machines (WM5 or WM6) Please have a look at http://dialect.sourceforge.net/ Dialect is an advanced, general purpose programming system for Windows 9x/ME/2000/XP and CE that allows developers to write applications with the following features: Cross-platform code (Win32 / WinCE). Capacity to pre-compile code for rapid execution. Integrated development environment with debugger that works on desktop and handheld PCs. Support for sockets, serial ports, files, registry access, DLLs, GUI elements, encryption (BlowFish), printing, etc. Exception handling mechanisms. Regular expressions. Generation of stand-alone executables. ADO database support. This seems a good approach of what should be Rebol 3 for small computers Best regards from Paris Le 19 dc. 07 05:02, Nick Antonaccio a crit :

 [39/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 19-Dec-2007 5:32


Thanks Francois. That looks a really nice Basic. I bought Basic4ppc a few years back, but this looks cleaner... Have you found a binary for win32? They also mentioned a Linux version, but at first glance, I haven't found any but CE version and source. I quickly tried to compile in VC++ Express 2005, but ran into a few errors. If binaries for Win32/Linux are available, I'd love to look at it more :) Quoting Fran=E7ois Jouen <fjouen-free.fr>:

 [40/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 19-Dec-2007 7:50


The win32 binary version of dialect is available at http://t-arn.com/freeware.htm (sorry for the off-topic post). Quoting Nick Antonaccio <nick1-musiclessonz.com>:

 [41/53] from: Paavo::Nevalainen::saunalahti::fi at: 23-Dec-2007 6:15


We have a tendency to produce code, which is ultimately fast or short in expression. It is so since we maybe compete a bit which each other, which may lead to bizarre code from the beginner's point of view - and from the point of view of any non-reboled person. And even a "personal programmer" have to cope with others nowadays.... So, it could be useful to rewrite some "classics" again readability in mind. Some examples could come in two versions, prototype or documentatory version, and optimised production code. I could help in that process, when R3 is ready (I know I am a simpleton, so obviously I am not the one who produces the optimised code ;) ) .

 [42/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 22-Dec-2007 23:24


Hi Paavo, Just tonight, a reader from my site wrote to say that in the past, all the documentation he had previously read had led him to misunderstood the syntax of a simple 'if expression, originally thinking that the conditional evaluation needed to be placed in brackets (which made every condition always evaluate to true...). Even things like that can be tripping blocks for newcomers, so I agree that obfuscated code can be totally unfathomable. With that said, it is important to recognize common code patterns and Rebolisms that are fast and short in expression, even if they're hard to read at first. I don't know that common (more difficult to read) syntax necessarily needs to be avoided and replaced with obvious patterns. (If they're common, they _should_ be internalized). Instead, what I missed in the beginning with Rebol was more documented examples ... I mean the kind of detailed, line by line documentation needed to understand each expression, as well as the overall structure of a script. I love the idea of maintaining a collection of useful, classic programs that demonstrate common techniques and solutions to typical problems and situations. Having a clear English language translation/explanation of any code, no matter how unreadable, can make it much more friendly to digest and internalize. If I were to put forth the effort, instead of rewriting examples to make them more readable, my suggestion would be to just write lots of more detailed explanation - LOTS more. Anyone interested in making Rebol more accessible to others could potentialy help by adding detailed documentation to scripts that are in the public domain. Anytime someone has an "aha" moment, understanding how a certain expression or code pattern works, in the example where it occurred, notating that realization would undoubtedly help others down the road... I'm sure that line-by-line explanations of more code from rebol.org would help average new users dramatically. Anyone can help with that sort of thing - and the wiki sites are great resources for creating repositories of analyzed and notated code. If anyone is interested in starting a project like that, we just need to copy over a few scripts to a chosen wiki, and add our own comments. As an example, I put Frank Sivertson's Rebtris, up at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming/Examples . I wonder how long it would take to get such a script completely notated... Quoting Paavo Nevalainen <Paavo.Nevalainen-saunalahti.fi>:

 [43/53] from: pwawood:gma:il at: 23-Dec-2007 16:33


Hi Paavo Sunanda started something like you suggested at http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display- article.r?article=j98t Perhaps it could provide a starting point. Regards Peter On Sunday, December 23, 2007, at 12:15 pm, Paavo Nevalainen wrote:

 [44/53] from: pwawood::gmail at: 23-Dec-2007 16:37


Hi Nick
> Just tonight, a reader from my site wrote to say that in the past, all > the documentation he had previously read had led him to misunderstood > the syntax of a simple 'if expression, originally thinking that the > conditional evaluation needed to be placed in brackets (which made > every condition always evaluate to true...).
I must be missing something:
>> (1 = 2)
== false
>> (1 = 1)
== true
>> ("a" = "a")
== true
>> ("a" > "c")
== false Regards Peter

 [45/53] from: Izkata:Comcast at: 23-Dec-2007 3:04


On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 16:37 +0800, Peter Wood wrote:
> Hi Nick > > Just tonight, a reader from my site wrote to say that in the past, all
<<quoted lines omitted: 11>>
> >> ("a" > "c") > == false
Brackets, not parens:
>> to-logic [1 = 2]
== true And I can see one reason why this would be especially confusing - 'if versus 'while. They both have conditionals, except 'while does use a block while 'if does not. This makes sense because the condition in an 'if is only evaluated once, while 'while needs to evaluate the condition multiple times, but the reasoning is only apparent once you understand how a block! works.

 [46/53] from: petr:krenzelok:seznam:cz at: 23-Dec-2007 10:14


Nick Antonaccio napsal(a):
> Hi Paavo, > Just tonight, a reader from my site wrote to say that in the past, all
<<quoted lines omitted: 13>>
> needed to understand each expression, as well as the overall structure > of a script.
Hi, dunno if following might help, but Carl once wrote suggested REBOL code formatting, and it is part of REBOL/Core documentation. It really helps if guys keep some rules, e.g. I absolutly hate, if someone uses something like: hello: func [ greeting ] [ print greeting ] :-) Here's link for suggested code patterns (although I know you have something a bit different in mind with code patterns probably): http://www.rebol.com/docs/core23/rebolcore-5.html#section-5 Petr

 [47/53] from: pwawood::gmail::com at: 23-Dec-2007 17:15


And I thought I had a good grasp of American !! Differences in punctuation () = brackets (UK English) = parentheses (US English) [] = square brackets (UK English) = brackets (US English) Source: Ritter RM. The Oxford guide to style. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. On Sunday, December 23, 2007, at 05:04 pm, Izkata wrote:

 [48/53] from: nick1::musiclessonz::com at: 23-Dec-2007 7:49


Hi Peter, I tried the link, but received a "file not found" error. Poking around Rebol.org, I saw this page by Brian Tiffin: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display-article.r?article=kg55x#section-3 Somehow, I'd never really paid much attention to those "documentation" links on each Rebol.org script (I think I'd maybe checked a few, years ago, and never found any content). It strikes me that since Rebol.org is likely one of the first places that newcomers go to read through code, that's a great solution, and one that new users should be made more aware of on the main documentation page at rebol.com. Maybe a documentation link right in the search results at rebol.org would make such materials more immediately apparent to newcomers. Also, you are correct - "square brackets" is more definitive. I should've also been more careful about spelling Frank Sievertsen's name correctly. Sorry Frank. Quoting Peter Wood <pwawood-gmail.com>:

 [49/53] from: Izkata::Comcast::net at: 23-Dec-2007 14:04


On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 17:15 +0800, Peter Wood wrote:
> And I thought I had a good grasp of American !! > > Differences in punctuation > () = brackets (UK English) = parentheses (US English) > [] = square brackets (UK English) = brackets (US English) > Source: Ritter RM. The Oxford guide to style. Oxford: Oxford University > Press, 2002.
..I did not know that. Huh. ~Files away under "Weirdness of the English Language"~

 [50/53] from: pwawood::gmail::com at: 24-Dec-2007 10:19


Hi Nick I messed up the link when I copied it: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display- article.r?article=j98t On Sunday, December 23, 2007, at 11:49 pm, Nick Antonaccio wrote:
> Hi Peter,
I messed up the link when I copied it: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display- article.r?article=j98t
> Somehow, I'd never really paid much attention to those "documentation" > links on each Rebol.org script (I think I'd maybe checked a few, years > ago, and never found any content).
Quite recently, Brian Tiffin spent a lot of his time documenting many un-owned scripts.
> It strikes me that since Rebol.org is likely one of the first places > that newcomers go to read through code, that's a great solution, and > one that new users should be made more aware of on the main > documentation page at rebol.com. Maybe a "documentation" link right > in the search results at rebol.org would make such materials more > immediately apparent to newcomers.
I'll see if I can help Sunanda come up with something. I know he's very busy at the moment.
> Also, you are correct - "square brackets" is more definitive.
That's just because I'm English and I really didn't know that Americans refer to brackets as parentheses in everyday language. In everyday English () are brackets, they are only parentheses in mathematical and scientific use. Regards Peter

 [51/53] from: nick1:musiclessonz at: 23-Dec-2007 23:09


Peter, Hehe, the link still seems to be messed up :) To anyone who may be interested in the idea of Rebol promotion: I came across a group called "Euses", which could potentially be helpful in extending Rebol's exposure: http://eusesconsortium.org/ They seem to have some significant reach, especially in the academic community, and the Rebol design principles maybe could be interesting to them. Their acronym stands for "end users shaping effective software". They're a consortium representing several universities, who's goal is to "empower end users to be able to write their own programs". They state that the number of end-user programmers in the United States is more than 20 times that of professional programmers (55 million end user programmers, compared to 2.75 million professionals). They strike me as a good group for Rebol to get involved with... Quoting Peter Wood <pwawood-gmail.com>:

 [52/53] from: pwawood::gmail at: 24-Dec-2007 15:24


Hi Nick It seems to be some problem with the encoding. Somewhere "3D" has been inserted between "?article=" and "j98t". It displays properly when viewed at mail.rebol.net (message number 46371) but is incorrect in your reply (46372). You'll also notice your reply has =20 inserted at the end of each wrapped line. Regards Peter Your email client On Monday, December 24, 2007, at 03:09 pm, Nick Antonaccio wrote:

 [53/53] from: Izkata::Comcast::net at: 24-Dec-2007 3:18


On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 15:24 +0800, Peter Wood wrote:
> Hi Nick > > It seems to be some problem with the encoding. Somewhere "3D" has been > inserted between "?article=" > and "j98t".
IIRC, putting an URL in these angled brackets prevents a mailer from line-wrapping it, which should also prevent = from being inserted: <http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display-article.r?article=kg55x#section-3> <http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display-article.r?article=j98t>

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted