Rebol on PocketPC ?? >> re: IPAQ ++
[1/8] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 17-Feb-2005 9:13
I am posting this again, as my first attempt vanished into the Rebol maling list void... Where do they go ?
> Rebol/View is not yet available for Windows/CE. > Far from having a small memory footprint, Rebol consumes large chunks of > memory. (That's why there isn't a Palm OS version).
[2/8] from: hallvard::ystad::oops-as::no at: 17-Feb-2005 9:40
Dixit "Jason Cunliffe" <[jasonic--nomadics--org]> (Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:13:21 +0100):
>I am posting this again, as my first attempt vanished >into the Rebol maling list void... >Where do they go ?
Maybe they take a detour by the void mailing list (http://void.slab.org/), and then never make it back? HY
[3/8] from: SunandaDH::aol::com at: 17-Feb-2005 4:07
> I am posting this again, as my first attempt vanished into the Rebol maling > list void... > Where do they go ?
The mailing list has been very flakey, but it did seem it was getting better. Most messages that fail to make it get to the list server but are not sent to all list subscribers. The reason is unknown. You can normally see those here: http://mail.rebol.net/cgi-bin/mail-list.r A few messages -- yours included as far as I can see -- don't even make it that far. It'd be worth dropping a feedback to rebol.com if you have the sender details. It might help them spot the problem. Sunanda.
[4/8] from: pwawood::mango::net::my at: 17-Feb-2005 17:44
> Thanks.. I see. I'd always thought and read about Rebol as being tiny > and > lightweight. Now I am really wondering.
Rebol has a tiny footprint in terms of the size of the executable.
> How much memory are we talking about?
Gabriele suggested in an earlier email that Rebol/Core takes about 2Mb upon loading before any script memory needs. View will take more.
> How variable is Rebol's use of memory?
I think that the price for Rebol's ease of use, flexibility and wide-ranging functionality is its memory usage.
> How does it compare to other PocketPC development tools?
The major difference must be that other PocketPC development tools don't run on the PocketPC, they are complied on a bigger machine which creates an executable (probably optimised to minimise memory usage). Being an interpreted language you need most (if not all) of the development functionality on the target machine. SuperWaba (a sawn-off java lookalike for Palm & CE) compiles to intermediate code (like Java). The Virtual Machine apparently takes between 500 & 700k on the PDA and applications are measured in 100ks not megabytes like Rebol. I hope that somebody will tell me that I'm wrong but I suspect that Rebol/View will only be really suitable for PDA development when PDAs have much more memory than today. Peter
[5/8] from: greggirwin::mindspring::com at: 17-Feb-2005 9:26
Base ~600K Face ~700K Core ~1.4M View ~3M Command/View ~3.8M If your app uses VID, that seems to be the really expensive part, in terms of memory. -- Gregg
[6/8] from: gchillemi:aliceposta:it at: 27-Feb-2005 1:58
R: Rebol on PocketPC ?? >> re: IPAQ ++
> So there is now a booming PocketPC market already for so many cool > little personal database and messaging applications.
I have already asked for Rebol on PocketPC but it seems there is no money at Rebol Tech to concentrate on this market. I would see rebol on WindowsCE.NET, Windows CE and Windows Mobile too. These are good markets but Rebol Tech, as said, lacks of resources. On a recent Blog post Carl seems to have analyzed this situation and he is taking into consideration the creation of a middle level of Rebol code that will be the only part that needs to be changed to let Rebol run on each platform. This code will be open (under some kind of licence) and developers with experience on a specific platform will take care of the porting. I think it is the best approach. Otherwise I see no way to have rebol running on so many systems and markets. Giuseppe Chillemi
[7/8] from: atruter:labyrinth:au at: 28-Feb-2005 14:42
> ... Otherwise I see no way to have rebol running on so many systems and > markets.
I'm sure RT would port to platform X if they were *paid* to do so. If you believe you have the ultimate Windows CE (or whatever) app that could earn a squillion dollars, then part with a few thousand dollars (or whatever you negotiate with RT) and do it. ;) Regards, Ashley
[8/8] from: gchillemi:aliceposta:it at: 23-Feb-2005 14:30
> So there is now a booming PocketPC market already for so many cool little > personal database and messaging applications.
I have already asked for Rebol on PPC but it seems there is no money at Rebol Tech to concentrate on this market. I would see rebol on WindowsCE.NET, Windows CE and Windows Mobile too. These are good markets but Rebol Tech, as said, lacks of resources. On a recent Blog post Carl seems to have analyzed this situation and he is taking into consideration the creation of a middle level of Rebol code that need to be changed to let Rebol run on each platform. This code will be open (under some kind of licence) and developers with experience on a specific platform will take care of the porting. I think it is the best approach. Otherwise I see no way to have rebol running on so many systems and markets. Giuseppe Chillemi