Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019 • Hacker News Board

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#71

Post by 9214 » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:01 PM UTC

hjek wrote: post #68

9214 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Articles you linked are fairly old, unofficial (that is, don't represent opinions of Red designers and developers) and are written by more-or-less experienced Rebol users. That is, it's hard to talk objectively when you have a tunnel vision accumulated over time. These languages are great, and deserves all the praise they get. As for shortcomings and limitations, here I can speak only form my experience. If you want…

Thanks for responding politely to my somewhat accusatory comment. It sounds like Red is driven by a small but very dedicated community, and the way it's both designed and promoted makes me think of TempleOS. Terry Davis' constant eulogies about how his own eccentric OS compares with Linux were obviously delusional (for a start, TempleOS doesn't do networking at all). Similarly comparing Red to Clojure when Red doesn'…

> comparing Red to Clojure when Red doesn't run on 64-bit machines is also misguided

It is misguided, and such comparison wasn't made by any of official representatives, if that's what you imply. I only recall that decision to make a split between Red Foundation and core development team was influenced by Clojure business model, which is backed by Cognitect (correct me if I'm wrong).

Project has ambitious goals and strong, visionary roadmap. Perhaps too strong, as your comparison to TempleOS is slightly worrisome to me ;) Which tells me that current approach to marketing and overall pitching should be reconsidered...

However, I strongly disagree that Red is esoteric, and all technological advances with implemented features up to this point (covered in official blog) serve as a testament to it.

As for small community - risking to sound like a snob, I'll say that Red might not be for everyone, so as any other language - it pick you, not the other way around. Besides, this is still the early days for us, full of ups and downs, challenges and struggles. These things, they take time [1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d6yBHDvKUw

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#72

Post by vanderZwan » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:11 PM UTC

9214 wrote: post #67

vanderZwan wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking more along the lines of [Somewhere between Easy and Hard?] - make the dialect operate in a safe sandbox that can't destroy your computer ... plus optionally convenience functions fitting for the creative problem domain like how Processing removes a lot of Java boilerplate, and p5 does similar things for using the various JS APIs. One can just look at the APIs of Processing, p5 and OpenFrameworks to get…

Safe sandbox: Rebol had Protect and Secure dialects [1, 2], which are planned to be implemented in Red. Language is very dynamic though, so there's a certain limit on what kind of safety can be enforced at runtime. Creative problem domain: that's what Red is all about in my point of view - slapping domain-specific languages one on top of another to pin down the exact problem space. Draw for 2d vector drawing, View fo…

Yes, thank you!

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#73

Post by sevensor » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

9214 wrote: post #48

sevensor wrote: post #46

I still don't know what to make of this language. If anything, it sounds too easy, making me think "what's the catch?" Is this a small programming cult or is it Czech wizardry obscured by a language barrier? Are there no highly visible Red projects because of shortcomings in the language and its community, or because the language is so potent, its users so empowered, that big libraries aren't necessary?

I do not appreciate your remark about our community and Czech-speaking part of it. This is rude and uncalled for. Regardless of gender and nationality of community members, and despite the fact that Red is an alpha software, the following projects were created, which may qualify as highly visible: * neural networks [1] * computer vision framework [2] * dataflow engine [3] * ports of (cross-platform) GUI widgets [4] *…

> I do not appreciate your remark about our community and Czech-speaking part of it. This is rude and uncalled for.

No offense was meant -- wizardry is no bad thing in my estimation, and the Red community seems like it may have a lot of Czech wizards in it. The juxtaposition with cult is meant to convey my confusion; I can't tell a cult from a cabal of wizards. Nor do I mean to imply that a language barrier is anybody's fault. A language barrier is a natural feature of the internet, like a river separating monolingual anglophones like me from Czech speakers. The point of my comment is that reading about Red always leaves me puzzled. I'm afraid your links, which I've followed to a depth of 1, have failed to dispel my confusion.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#74

Post by MikeLui » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:16 PM UTC

vanderZwan wrote: post #57

wiremine wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the OP (and not associated with red an anyway, other than being a fan of REBOL), and I agree the wording deserved to be called out. "cult" and "Czech wizardry" aren't exactly positive framing words. Hopefully this doesn't spiral into a discussion about PC comments, because red looks to be cool and deserves a good technical discussion; but I don't think 9214 was off base calling out the comment.

> "Czech wizardry" It could be a compliment of course, like "wow, this stuff is amazing tech wizardry that should be much more appreciated, and probably would be if not for the language barrier!" Let's just agree that natural languages are too fuzzy and ambiguous and assume good faith.

I'm reminded of this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/opinion/reclaiming-jew.ht...

> To be “a real Christian” is a compliment, but to be “a real Jew” is considered an insult.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#75

Post by sevensor » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:19 PM UTC

9214 wrote: post #69

DSingularity wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, but just an FYI that was probably a complement. Wizardry and magic has positive vibes in American culture. I can see how that might not be the case in others.

"Wizardry" surrounded by "cult", "no highly visible projects" and "shortcomings", followed by unbacked focus on a particular national group reads more like "quackery" to me. I get that meaning might be lost in translation, but also think that it's fair to assume the worst, esp. on an Internet forum.

> it's fair to assume the worst

I, on the other hand, will upvote your comments because they add context to my own.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#76

Post by 9214 » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:22 PM UTC

sevensor wrote: post #73

9214 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not appreciate your remark about our community and Czech-speaking part of it. This is rude and uncalled for. Regardless of gender and nationality of community members, and despite the fact that Red is an alpha software, the following projects were created, which may qualify as highly visible: * neural networks [1] * computer vision framework [2] * dataflow engine [3] * ports of (cross-platform) GUI widgets [4] *…

> I do not appreciate your remark about our community and Czech-speaking part of it. This is rude and uncalled for. No offense was meant -- wizardry is no bad thing in my estimation, and the Red community seems like it may have a lot of Czech wizards in it. The juxtaposition with cult is meant to convey my confusion; I can't tell a cult from a cabal of wizards. Nor do I mean to imply that a language barrier is anybod…

My apologies then, better to be safe than sorry.

Like I said, the best way to dispel the confusion is to play with Red by yourself and ask question in community chat. It is puzzling at first, but clicks over time.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#77

Post by ummonk » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:24 PM UTC

9214 wrote: post #69

DSingularity wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, but just an FYI that was probably a complement. Wizardry and magic has positive vibes in American culture. I can see how that might not be the case in others.

"Wizardry" surrounded by "cult", "no highly visible projects" and "shortcomings", followed by unbacked focus on a particular national group reads more like "quackery" to me. I get that meaning might be lost in translation, but also think that it's fair to assume the worst, esp. on an Internet forum.

This definitely seems like a language issue. “Wizardry” has a very positive connotation of using technical magic to achieve amazing results.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#78

Post by Izkata » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:39 PM UTC

hjek wrote: post #54

9214 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not appreciate your remark about our community and Czech-speaking part of it. This is rude and uncalled for. Regardless of gender and nationality of community members, and despite the fact that Red is an alpha software, the following projects were created, which may qualify as highly visible: * neural networks [1] * computer vision framework [2] * dataflow engine [3] * ports of (cross-platform) GUI widgets [4] *…

> > If anything, it sounds too easy, making me think "what's the catch? > This is rude and uncalled for. I think she/he raise a fair point about how the Red language is advertised, and it's actually a rather friendly to assume that it's due to language barrier. Many posts about Red/Rebol are unequivocal praise with very few details or any acknowledgements of short-comings or limitations of the languages. Just to dig…

> (Are Red/Rebol creators seriously claiming that Clojure's syntax is complex?)

The huge paragraph you're responding to refers to the programming stack as a whole. In reference to Clojure, it's including the JVM.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#79

Post by scottlocklin » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:54 PM UTC

rebolek wrote: post #3

echelon wrote: post #2

A language with a GC does not seem appropriate for a "full-stack" language with which one would write operating systems, drivers, or game engines. I don't know why any language without full manual memory management would ever posit itself as being appropriate for these domains. It's naive at best.

You are right that GC s not good fit for low level programming, but Red solves this problem with dialects (DSL) of Red. For low-level it uses Red/System [1], which is C-like language with Red syntax. There are also other dialects (DSLs) for other areas like GUI, parsing, etc... It's better approach IMO than trying to solve everything with one language. [1] https://static.red-lang.org/red-system-specs.html

This was something that definitely got my attention.

If the butthurtness of 9214 above is representative of the community, though, I'd probably last 10 minutes in their forum before being banned for life.

Re: Red Programming Language: Plans for 2019

#80

Post by greggirwin » Mon, Jan 07, 2019, 6:54 PM UTC

dmitriid wrote: post #59

hjek wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > If anything, it sounds too easy, making me think "what's the catch? > This is rude and uncalled for. I think she/he raise a fair point about how the Red language is advertised, and it's actually a rather friendly to assume that it's due to language barrier. Many posts about Red/Rebol are unequivocal praise with very few details or any acknowledgements of short-comings or limitations of the languages. Just to dig…

One of the reasons is that the Red community is very small and entrenched. They know everything that comes out of the language, and to them everything is easy and understandable. They will fight you to the death if you even try to say that "english-like syntax with no parantheses" is the opposite of readable or understandable when you don't know the system. Go into any of Red's source files and you will end up lookin…

Development is far from haphazard, but we're always open to examples of how other projects we can learn from, as long as it's a fair comparison and the resource and organization aspects align enough that we can leverage things we learn.