> And use official resources (Red and Rebol websites) as references, would you? Wiki page is an extremely weak testimony to whatever you have to say.
That's my mistake. The quote about Clojure I provided were from `redprogramming.com` which is linked to from the official website and from your Github, so it looked official to me.
The comparison with Python is from a blog of one of the Rebol developers. Not sure whether that qualifies as official.
If the Wikipedia article about Red is wrong, it might be a good idea to correct it..?
> Even if there is a cost in using Rebol2 as bootsrapping language, it will be gone with 1.0 release. [...] (since when bootstrapping language is a dependency?)
That's cool, and I wasn't aware of that. I just assumed Red was to Rebol what Hy is to Python and Clojure to Java, but that's great that that is a non-issue!
> `redprogramming.com` which is linked to from the official website
Official page links to learning resources provided by community, to compensate for TBD state of official documentation. We can't, however, control other people's opinions, or dictate them how to express themselves.
People can unintentionally say provocative things in a burst of excitement, I hope you understand that. And there are reasons to be excited about Red and Rebol.
> The comparison with Python is from a blog of one of the Rebol developers. Not sure whether that qualifies as official.
As I said, we can't control other people, and are not responsible for other's bold claims. I too do not think that this benchmark was fair and objective. As for the wiki page - we'll note that. I'm just saying that any other person can go there and apply his/her edits, without project's consent.
> I just assumed Red was to Rebol what Hy is to Python and Clojure to Java, but that's great that that is a non-issue!
It's good that this confusion is resolved. Hy and Clojure are hosted languages by nature, but Red is entirely self-contained (although you might think that it depends on Red/System dialect).
That's my mistake. The quote about Clojure I provided were from `redprogramming.com` which is linked to from the official website and from your Github, so it looked official to me.
The comparison with Python is from a blog of one of the Rebol developers. Not sure whether that qualifies as official.
If the Wikipedia article about Red is wrong, it might be a good idea to correct it..?
> Even if there is a cost in using Rebol2 as bootsrapping language, it will be gone with 1.0 release. [...] (since when bootstrapping language is a dependency?)
That's cool, and I wasn't aware of that. I just assumed Red was to Rebol what Hy is to Python and Clojure to Java, but that's great that that is a non-issue!