Sorry I don't come back on the "want to see if it works on the wild before". I'll certainly show the source, even if it doesn't (work on the wild), but please wait.
Plus, hmmm, did you even bother trying it? You may have chosen another username, but:
arc> (user->repl* "rntz")
If you have chosen another username, OK, no problem (but I can't guess). If you've not tried it, your choice, but then I'll parse your request as "Gosh palsecam is such a moron, an REPL on the browser has no future, performance/privacy issue, blahblahblah, but I'll be glad to steal his code for another more useful purpose that I'll not communicate about".
I am, at least I hope, certainly wrong on my analysis, but sorry, that's how I read your message.
And obviously, I don't like to be taken for a moron. And obviously, I don't like this kind of "stealing".
1: I'm sure some people think this. They might be right, but this kind of reasoning also lead to "GMail/... has no future", which was proved to be wrong.
I don't know if I'll seriously keep on working on the evsrv, but I can think of lots of good features that being web-based would enabled.
rntz, if you think this is a stupid idea, I have no problem with this, but then tell us about the (better) idea for which you'd like to use the code.
It's true I don't (well, didn't) have an account on the eval server. I didn't really feel the need to try it, not because I think it's crap, but because... well, it's a persistent REPL on the web. That's most of what I need to know, really, and if I ever need a persistent web-based REPL I'll know where to go - I trust it to be everything you say it is (and now that I've looked at it, it is; and it's swanky to boot). Just because I don't yet have a use for a thing doesn't mean I think it's crap. Hell, I don't yet have a "real" use for Arc itself beyond just playing with it as a sort of language sandbox - I haven't even tried firing up the webserver that comes with it! Does that mean I think arc or the arc webserver is crap? Hell no.
I have no intention of stealing your code. If you don't want to share your code, then don't; I tend to assume that Arc-related stuff will be open-source simply because it's common. And if you do share your code, I won't use it for some private purpose that "I'll not communicate about"; I'd share it back. That's how open source works.
The reason why I asked to see the source, despite you noting that you didn't intend to release it until testing it in the wild, was because I imagined (as CatDancer seems to have surmised) that the reason you didn't release it was because you weren't satisfied with its quality yet; hence the comment about "even if it has bugs or scalability issues or whatever".
The reason why I want to see your code is not, then, because I think you've done a bad job - how could I? As you noted, I hadn't even tried it when I made the post. Rather, I'd like to see it because in order to implement it, you have to have done some cool stuff (for example, AJAX, and some way of maintaining a persistent REPL) in arc that I would find instructive to read and possibly useful in the future. I don't ask with a purpose already in mind, but rather to learn; that's why I'm using Arc in the first place.
I think I may be able to clear up a bit of confusion here.
All (almost all?) of the code related to Arc so far has been released as open source by various authors, including rntz's extensive work with Anarki.
Thus when code hasn't been released, it's been because the author doesn't think it's good enough yet, instead of because the author wants to keep it proprietary.
So when one of us sees something cool, it's not uncommon for us to say, "oooh, we'd like to see the source to that!" Not as a request to give away something proprietary, but to say that if someone has code that they'll be making open source anyway, to encourage them to go ahead and release it, because it looks cool.
I'm pretty sure it was a statement of curiosity. I'd venture to say that that's the intention most of us would have in asking to see the source. (Hell, I'd be interested in seeing it.) You're probably reading too much into this.
(Plus, it's not really "stealing" if you willingly share the code.)