Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Getting started with Readable Human Format

readable.red

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#11

Post by wool_gather »

zepto wrote: post #7
azhenley wrote: post #2

A recent HN discussion about the Red language that is helpful if you don't know much about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18843544

This is not the same language. Readable.red: “The ReAdABLE Human Format aims at Agile Documentation by making WRITING and READING document easier for End User and Developer alike, while allowing a high degree of flexibility.” red-lang.org: “Red’s ambitious goal is to build the world’s first full-stack language, a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL. You've probab…

> a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL

Swift has this same stated goal. I guess ambition is good, but I really don't understand why you would try to make one tool handle such wildly different use cases. It's like me saying "my handheld electric jigsaw can be used from ripping full plywood sheets, up to cabinetry through luthiery". Well, sure, it can...but it's not actually good at more than one or two of those things.

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#12

Post by zozbot123 »

wool_gather wrote: post #11
zepto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the same language. Readable.red: “The ReAdABLE Human Format aims at Agile Documentation by making WRITING and READING document easier for End User and Developer alike, while allowing a high degree of flexibility.” red-lang.org: “Red’s ambitious goal is to build the world’s first full-stack language, a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL. You've probab…

> a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL Swift has this same stated goal. I guess ambition is good, but I really don't understand why you would try to make one tool handle such wildly different use cases. It's like me saying "my handheld electric jigsaw can be used from ripping full plywood sheets, up to cabinetry through luthiery" . Well, sure, it can ...but it's…

Rust has hygienic macros which one can use to build EDSL's. It's not that hard.

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#13

Post by anamexis » 

  That's all you need to know as business user except one more 
  thing: if ever your text contains any word containing "Red" 
  (red is ok) you must replace this string by "Red" (in a 
  future evolution, we'll do it for you.)
..but why? I don't know anything about Red or this, but why on earth?

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#15

Post by fwip »

anamexis wrote: post #13

That's all you need to know as business user except one more thing: if ever your text contains any word containing "Red" (red is ok) you must replace this string by "Red" (in a future evolution, we'll do it for you.) ..but why? I don't know anything about Red or this, but why on earth?

My guess is it's related to Step 2 on their page, "add inline code to generate output or create a build script." The markup for that seems to start with "Red []"

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#16

Post by whatshisface »

zozbot123 wrote: post #12
wool_gather wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL Swift has this same stated goal. I guess ambition is good, but I really don't understand why you would try to make one tool handle such wildly different use cases. It's like me saying "my handheld electric jigsaw can be used from ripping full plywood sheets, up to cabinetry through luthiery" . Well, sure, it can ...but it's…

Rust has hygienic macros which one can use to build EDSL's. It's not that hard.

No matter how hygenic the macros are, you'll still end up with the problem of a million different DSLs, five for each codebase. With partial-stack languages, different projects can share the same language for each level of the stack.

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#17

Post by zepto »

azhenley wrote: post #10
zepto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the same language. Readable.red: “The ReAdABLE Human Format aims at Agile Documentation by making WRITING and READING document easier for End User and Developer alike, while allowing a high degree of flexibility.” red-lang.org: “Red’s ambitious goal is to build the world’s first full-stack language, a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL. You've probab…

The previous title was referring to Red, which is the same Red that I linked to.

The linked article has never had anything to do with the article you linked to.

The term ‘Red’ is used as a contraction by the ‘Readable Human Format’.

It’s not clear to my why you think the previous title would be referring to a project other than the one that it linked to.

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#18

Post by azhenley »

zepto wrote: post #17
azhenley wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The previous title was referring to Red, which is the same Red that I linked to.

The linked article has never had anything to do with the article you linked to. The term ‘Red’ is used as a contraction by the ‘Readable Human Format’. It’s not clear to my why you think the previous title would be referring to a project other than the one that it linked to.

Red is the programming language I linked to. This Readable Human Format is an example of something you can do using the Red language that I linked to. This article on Readable Human Format makes you install the Red language I referred to:

> Install only older version, for windows: https://static.red-lang.org/dl/win/red-063.exe

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#19

Post by zepto »

wool_gather wrote: post #11
zepto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the same language. Readable.red: “The ReAdABLE Human Format aims at Agile Documentation by making WRITING and READING document easier for End User and Developer alike, while allowing a high degree of flexibility.” red-lang.org: “Red’s ambitious goal is to build the world’s first full-stack language, a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL. You've probab…

> a language you can use from system programming tasks, up to high-level scripting through DSL Swift has this same stated goal. I guess ambition is good, but I really don't understand why you would try to make one tool handle such wildly different use cases. It's like me saying "my handheld electric jigsaw can be used from ripping full plywood sheets, up to cabinetry through luthiery" . Well, sure, it can ...but it's…

Why do you think they are different use cases?

The electric jigsaw example seems to illustrate the contrary of what you think it does because as technology advances it actually does make it possible for a tool to cover more use cases effectively. E.g. example an electric jigsaw covers more use cases than a manual hacksaw.

It’s possible to imagine a miniature drone with a high powered cutting laser that is controlled via an AR/VR interface that would be able to do anything from felling trees to cutting your fingernails. Obviously we’re some way off having that technology today.

But by analogy, it seems like we’re in a much better position to make programming languages that cover a broader and broader set of use cases, because we aren’t so constrained by materials science.

Why would you make one programming language to handle all of these cases? Surely there’s an incredibly strong case for that:

1. It makes more use cases accessible with less cognitive load. That’s pretty much the reason we have programming languages at all.

2. Investments in tooling etc. are magnified.

Re: Getting started with Readable Human Format

#20

Post by rebolek »

anamexis wrote: post #13

That's all you need to know as business user except one more thing: if ever your text contains any word containing "Red" (red is ok) you must replace this string by "Red" (in a future evolution, we'll do it for you.) ..but why? I don't know anything about Red or this, but why on earth?

This is project done in Red and it's a limitation of that project, not of Red language.
Post reply on HN