Red Programming Language 0.6.3

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by throwaway7645 on Monday July 17, 2017 @09:56PM (#14793806)

You're correct. It's crazy what you can do when you don't bundle 8 zillion MB of C in your install. Rebol is the original parent language, but it doesn't have a system language to compile to, just a < 5 MB interpreter that you could do a lot with. Neat little languages. The creator wanted to take Rebol and write a version that would be the first true "Full Stack" language covering everything from desktop GUI to building OS, to highly advanced parsing, to robotics. If you google it, there is a nice interview with Red's primary author Nenad Rackocevic (forgive spelling) that is from ~2015, but still should be accurate.

Interview:

https://notamonadtutorial.com/interview-with-nenad-rakocevic...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by draegtun on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @11:53AM (#14797507)

>> just a < 5 MB interpreter that you could do a lot with

Just to note that Rebol 2 is below 1 MB. Depending on platform, Core is normally below 300K and View is around 600-800K - http://www.rebol.com/downloads.html

Unfortunately Rebol 3 (Ren/C branch) is a little beefier at this moment :( The non debug version is usually between 1.2 & 1.9 MB - http://metaeducation.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html

This Rebol 3 size will shrink. Currently there is development on build & extension process which will help. NB. There's been a big refactoring/redesign of the Rebol 3 interpreter in last couple of years so there maybe (still) some artefacts from many forks/merging of codebase that could also be shaken out.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by ASipos on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @02:03AM (#14794505)

Offtopic nitpick:

I never understood stuff like writing "forgive spelling" or "sp?" when the correct spelling is a Google away.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by rendall on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @02:41AM (#14794669)

I'd rather have misspelled information than not have it.

Some folks might be on a mobile device with an interface that makes it difficult to switch to another window. Or perhaps they are offline when they're writing it. Or perhaps they have mobility / accessibility issues that makes switching a challenge. Those are off the top of my head.

To my mind, worrying about someone's spelling when I can understand them perfectly is one of those "life's too short" issues, speeking personaly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by coldtea on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @05:30AM (#14795292)

>Some folks might be on a mobile device with an interface that makes it difficult to switch to another window. Or perhaps they are offline when they're writing it. Or perhaps they have mobility / accessibility issues that makes switching a challenge. Those are off the top of my head.

There's also momentum. They want to go write a quick comment and type their thoughts as they come -- not stop and Google things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by greggirwin on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @11:51AM (#14797495)

This is certainly how I am sometimes. I will stop to check things, but it breaks the flow. And, as comments here point out, docs are a big issue. What isn't always clear is how much effort they take to create. With a small team, it's a constant struggle for where to allocate resources. Right now, Red's priorities are based on deliverable functionality.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by throwaway7645 on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @12:27PM (#14797812)

Thanks Greg! That is well understood and fine by me. I just don't want to see Red's doc to end up like Rebol's. Honestly, it is probably a non-trivial factor for why it never took off.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by greggirwin on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @03:32PM (#14799367)

Still, https://doc.red-lang.org/en/ has some nice docs, and more are in the works.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Red Programming Language 0.6.3 by throwaway7645 on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @09:00AM (#14796160)

As the comments suggest below: Googling isn't worth it on a mobile device and it interrupts the train of thought.

[ Parent | on HN ]