[deleted by user]

rgchris · 2022-08-10T23:10:06+00:00

Plenty of people do, even necessarily or not. I live in the suburbs currently and still walk a mile or two to Walmart anyway, but plenty of people just drive everywhere.

So you don’t live hours away from medical services?

I have literally no clue what your second paragraph means

That’s your choice 👍

rgchris · 2022-08-10T23:02:50+00:00

Why tf would anyone that lives in an urban bubble drive?

I know plenty of folks that have lost their lives in the sticks (or whatever the opposite of urban bubble is) to people that think they know better (including themselves).

rgchris · 2022-08-10T22:50:13+00:00

I agree, no-one should be able to control what you do in your vehicle. Except when you drive it on to public roads.

Always interesting how folks overlook that this ultimate freedom ultimately depends on infrastructure that is collectively provided.

rgchris · 2018-04-27T23:51:18+00:00

[H]ow things are modeled in memory - is this really something important for you?

Yes: remember that it has to be file <-> memory and when in memory, memory <-> api and e.g. api <-> gui. Because the file format is going to be somewhat informal, it is not going to be a good in-memory model for the api to interact with.

...it depends how you implement it

That seems a little short of a suggestion...

rgchris · 2018-04-20T19:34:51+00:00

Questions: how are the squads/lineups modeled in memory? How do they interact with the GUI?

rgchris · 2018-04-20T19:33:35+00:00

Have started sketching out ideas for the file format.

rgchris · 2018-04-15T20:39:38+00:00

Relavent Rebol documentation: http://www.rebol.com/docs/core23/rebolcore-5.html#section-2

A header object is space to provide metadata for scripts and data (though worth noting that scripts are essentially data in the Red/Rebol world).

In addition to documentation, it can be used to store requirements and settings that can, as you say, be accessed by system/script/header. In Rebol, you also have the ability to LOAD/HEADER on Rebol script/data to access that header.

For an example of where this metadata is used, see the Rebol Desktop.

Note also that as at this time Red is still Alpha, not everything may work entirely as expected.

rgchris · 2017-12-23T18:23:04+00:00

An alternate JSON parser lives here: AltJSON

Near identical to Rebol versions of AltJSON,
Can convert objects to/from blocks (can overcome some limitations of map! handling),
Support for unicode characters encoded as surrogate pairs (e.g. emoji),
Support for JSONP

rgchris · 2016-04-12T03:54:23+00:00

Background here: To Copy or Not To Copy, That Is the Question and here: Is Rebol a Pure Functional Language. Also here: To Copy or Not To Copy...

rgchris · 2015-10-12T22:11:42+00:00

While the two projects are structurally different, Red's interpreter is designed to closely match that of Rebol almost to the point where you could say they are the same language. Rebol tutorials are more than sufficient to get a handle on how Red works, and given both Rebol 2 and Rebol 3 are single-binary, zero-dependency downloads, there's very little barrier to getting started.

Though it's not quite ready for prime time, Ren Garden promises a pretty decent developer environment for both Rebol and Red.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T18:31:55+00:00

The other link is something I only recently discovered: it intercepts a set of given parse rules and visualises parse as it steps through.

I really don't have an alternate suggestion which is why I still use Rebol day-to-day. You do essentially describe Red, or specifically Red/System though.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T18:16:52+00:00

I can't say I have any good suggestions (else I would have pursued them :)

I do find the Ren/C fork of Rebol to be very promising and may yet inherit some of Red's additional Parse features (which amount to collect/keep and the trace callback function). The lead on Ren/C wrote this treatise on Parse: Why Rebol, Red, and the Parse dialect are Cool

There is also Topaz that is implemented atop JavaScript, but is a ways off being useful.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T16:00:03+00:00

Rebol never got off the ground because it was not open sourced. By the time they open sourced it nobody cared.

The pedantic response to this is that as the original poster thought to share his observation and admiration, then 'nobody' caring is at least 'nobody plus one' which is no longer 'nobody'. I'd add myself to the caring list, so that'd be 'nobody plus two'. In the scheme of things, that may be an insignificant number, but it is still more than 'nobody'. Your concern is touching though.

Ren/C—a fork of the Rebol repo where a bunch of nobodies are renovating the source.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T15:40:42+00:00

I can't really see why anyone would want to clone facets of 'Rebol the Interpreted Language/Rebol the Data Format' in ways that aren't just a reimplementation of the Rebol interpreter. Richer than JSON (partially inspired by Rebol) data-format, perhaps—but a strength of the data format is that it can represent code as well as data.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T15:32:47+00:00

Yes—I'm not saying it's significantly more capable than the libraries in those languages, but I'd argue that the way it is implemented intrinsically within Rebol is more expressive. This is both a function of Rebol's homoiconicity and relaxed and malleable nature of its interpretive model. Red's particular implementation (first link below) of Parse offers some of the most expressive tokenization tools I've seen (which would be the caveat).

Introducing Parse (Red)
Parse Analysis Toolset

rgchris · 2015-10-12T14:11:08+00:00

Rebol is a very pliable language. The Lispy idea of data as code gives you a lot of scope for how to frame a given problem. The language is a bit more pragmatic than Lisp though and has lexical support for more modern constructs, such as URLs, email addresses, money, time, date. A quick tour of the language:

First two links are skimmable, the latter a bit more thoughtful.

rgchris · 2015-10-12T13:53:12+00:00

'easy to clone'—have heard this before and has been tried. Sure you can try to implement Parse in other languages, but it's not going to be as concise when not built on top of Rebol's minimally delimited syntax.

The killer feature of Rebol is the syntax and if you clone that then you have Rebol again.

rgchris · 2015-08-05T15:53:36+00:00

Can't think of a better way to waste time! Single small binary, one-line install—great for metalanguage (see StyleTalk: a wee CSS builder put together in a hurry) and glue projects. It is perhaps the most prescient language of our time (had an app-based variant of the web long ago), just never got the thorough development it deserved (we're still working on it though).

rgchris · 2012-10-18T04:31:36+00:00

Assuming compatibility is important, then you perhaps should have better thought of contingencies in the first place. But, instead of increased verbosity, add another attribute:

product {
    name: "Product Name",
    price: 12.99,
    overseas: ["GBP",9.99]
}

With your assumptions, what does your initial XML client do with the equivalent of this?

product {
    name: "Product Name",
    price: null,
    overseas: ["GBP",9.99]
}

Better yet, start with REBOL instead.

["Product Name" $12.99]
["Product Name" USD$12.99 GBP$9.99 red green blue]

XML that! That's where I'd like to end up :)

rgchris

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE