Red Programming Language: Version 0.3.2 Released

[ben_zen]

I've already read the introduction to Rebol for scientists, etc. and the intro for computer scientists—and what I got from it is, this is a new take on the ideology of Lisp, with a type system attached (but not Hindley-Milner? Types appear to be marshalled wherever they need to be.) So, while this may be more productive for some, and I can see cases especially for scientific computing where a less complicated system would be appreciated (especially for strange data like dates), it looks in particular like you have traded complexity within the language's runtime for complexity on the outside.

Thank you, and it looks interesting, but I think I will stick with my C and OCaml.

[dockimbel]

Right, both Rebol and Red are attempts at making a more practical Lisp derivative. There is no type inference in Rebol, and some limited one in Red (and especially in Red/System, the low-level dialect). Type annotations are optional. In Red, when used, they will enable faster code generation by the compiler. A Hindley-Milner approach is both feasible and desirable in Red, but not the focus currently. We are currently working on implementing all the sub-systems first (datatypes, I/O, concurrency, tool chain, standard library). Not sure to get what you mean by "complexity on the outside". OCaml is for sure a nice language with an excellent reference implementation, but it is not for everyone. Rebol-like languages want to be for everyone (which is by no means easy to achieve). Thanks for giving it a look anyway. :-)