| # | User | Message | Date |
| 3483 | Gregg | Yes. Conceptual integrity will help all the way through IMO. | 11-Jan-10 20:17 |
| 3482 | Fork | Gregg: Perhaps http://www.haiku-os.org/ is an example of the kind of thing you are talking about. | 11-Jan-10 18:27 |
| 3481 | Gregg | I think it would be great if the feel of the graphics on the site, and the logo, could match the feel of the GUI. I know GUis will have skins and themes, but a consistent message could go a long way. Is REBOL mainly a server scripting tool, or is it a slick-UI tool? And if View has a different target than REBOL/Command SDK, their icons can be themed as such. | 11-Jan-10 17:53 |
| 3480 | PeterWood | Yes that's it. | 11-Jan-10 5:34 |
| 3479 | Fork | There's this: http://www.rebol.com/r3/docs/concepts/scripts-style.html | 11-Jan-10 5:21 |
| 3478 | PeterWood | There used to be an official coding "style" guide on rebol.com but I wasn't able to find it. It seems to have got lost during the website refurbishment. | 11-Jan-10 5:18 |
| 3477 | Fork | I hope people put pressure on Rebol 3 having a strong visual message, and that graphic design is not ignored. Thus far it does not seem to have been given any attention. My idea is supposed to be a kick-start to that process but not the final answer. | 11-Jan-10 4:38 |
| 3476 | Fork | I tend to use camelCase for local variables to distinguish them from functions, but I don't have particularly strong feelings. If there are Rebol coding standards then perhaps a wiki article describing them would be a good project for someone who knows them to undertake :) | 11-Jan-10 4:34 |
| 3475 | Fork | Glad you guys like it... | 11-Jan-10 4:33 |
| 3474 | Gregg | Fork's icon is very cool. | 10-Jan-10 23:53 |
| 3473 | Gregg | Is camelCase used for a reason, rather than following the standard REBOL style? | 10-Jan-10 23:49 |
| 3472 | Gregg | Good stuff Fork! Scoping: make-employee: func [name id] [ employee: make object! compose [ name: (name) id: (id) ] return employee ] 'employee isn't declared as local. Is it explicit to make the explanation more concrete? | 10-Jan-10 23:36 |
| 3471 | NickA | I really like the logo, and your scoping article is easily understandable. | 10-Jan-10 4:48 |
| 3470 | NickA | Fork, great articles and ideas :) | 10-Jan-10 4:47 |
| 3469 | Fork | I didn't feel like learning any rendering packages so I subcontracted that, but it's not a final rendering carefully done... just communicates the possibility... | 9-Jan-10 18:58 |
| 3468 | Fork | (Clipboard being wonky in AltME for some reason) | 9-Jan-10 18:56 |
| 3467 | Fork | Er, http://www.elance.com/experts/serbia_vojvodina_vrsac/3d_modeling_animation/1853084 | 9-Jan-10 18:55 |
| 3466 | Fork | The 3D one was rendered by Milan Antovic: http://github.com/hostilefork/rebmu/blob/master/rebmu.r | 9-Jan-10 18:55 |
| 3465 | Fork | Brock: Sketchup | 9-Jan-10 18:54 |
| 3464 | Brock | Hey Fork, what tool did you use to generate the isometric images? Or what technique? | 9-Jan-10 18:48 |
| 3463 | Fork | And since we share a leaning toward an interest in design, I'll share the Icon/identity ideas I had: http://rebol.net/wiki/REBOL_logo | 9-Jan-10 9:48 |
| 3462 | Fork | I've started some crude articles (and BrianH has earned the diligence barnstar for correcting them), but they're nothing compared to what they could be if more than two people were poking at them. http://rebol.net/wiki/Scoping_in_Rebol http://rebol.net/wiki/Dialect_Design_Considerations http://rebol.net/wiki/The_Invariants_of_Rebol | 9-Jan-10 9:47 |
| 3461 | Fork | "Look, maybe you just suck at explaining." :) :) | 9-Jan-10 9:42 |
| 3460 | Fork | Reichart: There was a quote Carl made (he was quoting someone else) comparing Rebol to the Matrix as being something "you either get or you don't". On a parallel note, I'd cite the first panel in this Xkcd: http://xkcd.com/566/ | 9-Jan-10 9:42 |
| 3459 | Reichart | Brian... agreed. | 9-Jan-10 9:14 |
| 3458 | Fork | Ladislav's Bindology is an excellent example--I think--of the kind of absolutely critical document that wasn't in Rebol's official documentation. (It's unclear why such a study would not be one of the first things done in a language project.) In any case, I think the wiki is a good place to be developing such narratives, and this is something I've been pushing for. | 9-Jan-10 7:20 |
| 3457 | Fork | Reichart's idea of each function having a page is a good start. But I also think there should be pages for cross-cutting topics that are linked to liberally when an issue of one of those functions touches upon it. | 9-Jan-10 7:16 |
| 3456 | Fork | BrianH: Thanks (for above). I do think that a wiki with only two people editing it is not quite going to demonstrate the potential. | 9-Jan-10 7:14 |
| 3455 | Gabriele | unless nobody cares, that is. | 7-Jan-10 10:47 |
| 3454 | Gabriele | right... but you can still roll back to a previous version of each page that has been modified... | 7-Jan-10 10:46 |
| 3453 | Pekr | cutton = cutting | 6-Jan-10 12:13 |
| 3452 | Pekr | Gabriele - very extensive changes, like cutton some docs into small pieces | 6-Jan-10 12:13 |
| 3451 | Gabriele | Petr, if someone ruined the wiki, why aren't the pages being rolled back? | 6-Jan-10 12:10 |
| 3450 | Graham | the help function I changed requires a separate page for each function .... in a specific format. | 4-Jan-10 22:23 |
| 3449 | BrianH | And about R2 as well, of course, especially about the new stuff. | 4-Jan-10 22:19 |
| 3448 | BrianH | Get Fork to help - he's good at wikis too. I'll chip in with knowledge about R3 as needed (and as available). | 4-Jan-10 22:17 |
| 3447 | BrianH | The other words can get a page each. | 4-Jan-10 22:15 |
| 3446 | BrianH | Make it a page hierarchy for PARSE and you've sold me. You're good at wikis, why don't you go for it? | 4-Jan-10 22:15 |
| 3445 | Reichart | wiki.REBOL.org/parse | 4-Jan-10 22:14 |
| 3444 | Reichart | I have a really "wild" idea for the "structure" of the wiki... One page for each REBOL word. I know, I live on teh very edge with these ideas fantastical ideas :) | 4-Jan-10 22:13 |
| 3443 | BrianH | Reichart, we have already answered the question of openness by providing both: One wiki that is open, for community management, and one wiki that is "official", for accuracy. You have to demonstrate a certain level of cluefulness to make changes to the official manual. We could modify the official wiki so that it links to the community wiki for comments, but history has proven that an open wiki can't be counted on to have a consistent structure, so we can't count on the pages we're linking to to be there. We may do that anyways, since it's a good idea (from you). | 4-Jan-10 20:39 |
| 3442 | Reichart | Henrik, Adrian, the good news is, you already have your wish... and therefore, things will stay pretty much the same... | 4-Jan-10 17:37 |
| 3441 | Pekr | I prefer R3 Chat (and WIP wiki) Carl did, because there is user ranking, and only users of certain ranking can do changes. Maybe it can be done with the MediaWiki too, I don't know ... | 4-Jan-10 15:00 |
| 3440 | Pekr | I lost complete interest in DocBase. While BrianH kind of welcomed structural changes one user dit, I feel completly lost. That persono completly ruined the DocBase. He has zero knowledge about R3 progress, and hence mixed stuff from Gabriele's VID and Carl's VID attempt. The info, which was nicely on one page, is now scattered to myriads of subpages, etc. This sucks ... | 4-Jan-10 14:59 |
| 3439 | Henrik | if we grow much more, we end up with cells of users that don't communicate or don't discover eachother and we might get more situations like what happened for the wiki. | 4-Jan-10 14:35 |
| 3438 | AdrianS | I can also see that it is somewhat of a catch-22 since the community might not grow due to poor documentation. I think I lean towards leaving things as they are for now since, as was pointed out, you can become an 'editor' without too much hassle. | 4-Jan-10 14:32 |
| 3437 | AdrianS | one problem I see with opening up the wikis to a larger degree is that the number of moderators (or perhaps more accurately, the number of people who are qualified to be moderators and who have the time and are willing to vet any changes/additions) is limited. Maybe once the community grows ease of access could be increased. | 4-Jan-10 14:29 |
| 3436 | Henrik | Accuracy is only lost, if the editor doesn't have any contact with us, so we can talk to him/her, which seems to be the case of the recent edits. | 4-Jan-10 9:25 |
| 3435 | Reichart | How is accuracy lost, I'm not suggesting unmoderated wikis, just ease of access? | 4-Jan-10 9:20 |
| 3434 | BrianH | If you meant what you said, then what we have to lose is appearances. We don't gain any help, just reputation. | 4-Jan-10 8:34 |
| 3433 | BrianH | Assming you meant "what do we have to lose by just opening everything up?" | 4-Jan-10 8:33 |
| 3432 | BrianH | Accuracy. | 4-Jan-10 8:31 |
| 3431 | Reichart | " To get back into noob level questions:" What is more noob than "is there documentation that explains things?" Gregg, right, so in simple terms, REBOL is so small, and so much a clique... what do we have to lose by not just opening everything up? (Docs I mean). | 4-Jan-10 8:15 |
| 3430 | Gregg | Some things you don't notice from the inside, until you're on the outside again. In support of making things open: I've recently read up on a few technologies and, while their blog entries and such are very nice, there were a number of typos. I wanted to just correct these little things, but I can't. I can't help in a very small, controlled way without talking to someone first, setting up an account, getting permission of some kind, etc. And that's just too much trouble to do for more than a small number of sites. It will get better, and it shouldn't be too hard to have even simple rules to control anonymous edits, but right now things are often all-or-nothing. | 4-Jan-10 5:40 |
| 3429 | Graham | even one on http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming/Parse for those who feel the need ... | 4-Jan-10 2:49 |
| 3428 | Graham | there's also the wiki book http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming/Language_Features/Recursion | 4-Jan-10 2:48 |
| 3427 | Steeve | well, just a joke Graham | 4-Jan-10 2:46 |
| 3426 | Graham | this topic does say "Ask any question ... " | 4-Jan-10 2:45 |
| 3425 | Steeve | Next discussion: The Multi-dimenssional parsing proposal. (to allow the parsing of 2 series at once with parallelism) | 4-Jan-10 2:42 |
| 3424 | Graham | Steeve is not very tolerant :) | 4-Jan-10 2:39 |
| 3423 | BrianH | Most of the other PARSE docs are strewn amongst the conversations where we just redid the whole thing lately. It was quite a project. Those discussions are in the blog comments, CureCode and that parse project wiki, very little in chat. | 4-Jan-10 2:34 |
| 3422 | Steeve | >> how: func [s][unless tail? s [prin to-char s/1 how next s]] >> how [82 84 70 77] RTFM== none | 4-Jan-10 2:33 |
| 3421 | Graham | >> countdown: func [ n ][ print n if not zero? n [ countdown -1 + n ]] >> countdown 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 | 4-Jan-10 2:28 |
| 3420 | Steeve | ahah | 4-Jan-10 2:27 |
| 3419 | joannak | Ok.. This is one of those moments I shoudl have tried it .. | 4-Jan-10 2:27 |
| 3418 | BrianH | http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Table_Of_Contents http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Parse_Project Someone was reorganizing the wiki recently with no understanding of the REBOL language, so a lot of pages were lost in the shuffle. I don't know where things are now. The price of being open, I guess. The new PARSE documentation hasn't yet been converted from an improvement project to documentation. Have at it :) | 4-Jan-10 2:27 |
| 3417 | Graham | Rebol supports recursion from day 1 .. 10+ years ago | 4-Jan-10 2:26 |
| 3416 | joannak | Hmm.. To get back into noob level questions: Is it so that Rebol don't support recursion? Or will some variant of Function allow it to call itself without hassle? | 4-Jan-10 2:23 |
| 3415 | BrianH | Btw, thanks Fork for being one of the most prolific of those people these days. | 4-Jan-10 2:22 |
| 3414 | Reichart | Ok, point me to the word PARSE, on a wiki, where I can edit the page about it, or add my two cents, it is very possible I'm just blind here... | 4-Jan-10 2:22 |
| 3413 | BrianH | Wikis need work too. Making them open doesn't magically get people to contribute their time. The wiki has been open for more than a year and only a few people contribute to it. | 4-Jan-10 2:21 |
| 3412 | Reichart | Well, I'm not trying to be a pain here..... so I will leave it at this.... When...anyone, can walk up to any REBOL word, learn about it, add to it, talk about it, for all others to share in and learn from, then... I'm happy. | 4-Jan-10 2:20 |
| 3411 | BrianH | Examples and docs, but it's not comprehensive in either the manual or DocBase yet. Needs work. | 4-Jan-10 2:19 |
| 3410 | Reichart | Are the docs (examples) for all words in REBOL (2, or 3) in that? | 4-Jan-10 2:17 |
| 3409 | BrianH | The community wiki is running on MediaWiki. | 4-Jan-10 2:16 |
| 3408 | Reichart | I guess what I'm really asking is, why is this not just like MediaWiki (which is behind Wikiepedia)? That simple. | 4-Jan-10 2:16 |
| 3407 | BrianH | The current chat client interface works well enough for me, but that's likely an outlier thing. | 4-Jan-10 1:58 |
| 3406 | BrianH | (delay, phone call) I agree about the input system, definitely, which is one of the reasons I encourage people to write their own chat clients. I'm not too good at writing REBOL GUIs, and don't have a web server to host a client. DevBase could work very well with a web client interface, afaict, if someone wants to write one of those. Heck, it's scriptable enough to integrate with Qtask, in theory. | 4-Jan-10 1:57 |
| 3405 | Reichart | I'm the co-founder of BIL (www.BILConference.com) , an open conference, the rule is "OPEN". That simple. Even from teh get go, my co-founders started trying to be "open" but controlling others.
It was really interesting... But, I STOOD STRONG on, let everyone do anything... and... it worked, REALLY WELL. That is not to say that as a group (mob) we did not "direct" people to help improve the s/n. | 4-Jan-10 1:38 |
| 3404 | Reichart | "we" arleady do by the very nature of the input system... | 4-Jan-10 1:36 |
| 3403 | BrianH | We try to not suppress voices (except the wiki spammers on the rebol.net). | 4-Jan-10 1:35 |
| 3402 | BrianH | The new development platforms of REBOL are all moderated. | 4-Jan-10 1:34 |
| 3401 | Reichart | Yup, I'm all for facism (truly, I think it has its place, and works), but only for moderators to control s/n, not to supress voices. | 4-Jan-10 1:34 |
| 3400 | BrianH | It's kind of graduated to more of an inner circle thing nowadays, Reichart, but good point. | 4-Jan-10 1:33 |
| 3399 | Reichart | Joannak, LOL, agreed... | 4-Jan-10 1:31 |
| 3398 | Reichart | "Reichart, CHAT shouldn't be a barrier to entry. We are trying to make it more accessible." The key to me here is once Carl "ok"s this one thing, then the rest of us can "help". | 4-Jan-10 1:30 |
| 3397 | joannak | Hmm.. I think I need to sart a new group here ... "I'm getting old and crumpy " :) | 4-Jan-10 1:29 |
| 3396 | Steeve | currently we can't download a single message knowing his Id. We only can download all the base, and the remaining messages each time the client sync. Not a good system to my mind | 4-Jan-10 1:29 |
| 3395 | BrianH | If you can help, Steeve, or even get started on it yourself, go for it. I don't think there is an API doc yet - the API changes too much. | 4-Jan-10 1:26 |
| 3394 | Graham | Awesome Stevee ... it will free up Brian to do other stuff | 4-Jan-10 1:26 |
| 3393 | Steeve | some functionalities are still missing to my mind | 4-Jan-10 1:25 |
| 3392 | Steeve | ... need of a draft about all the api to exchange with the server | 4-Jan-10 1:25 |
| 3391 | Steeve | but i may | 4-Jan-10 1:24 |
| 3390 | joannak | Hmm I really shoudl try to use R3 , at least to see that chat.. | 4-Jan-10 1:24 |
| 3389 | BrianH | I plan to write an R2 chat client this month (with as much help as is made available). At first it will be a clone of R3 chat, but there is nothing in the DevBase server API that requires the clients to be in text mode. | 4-Jan-10 1:24 |
| 3388 | Steeve | ahah, i could give it a try, a studied a lot the source in the past | 4-Jan-10 1:24 |
| 3387 | Graham | Brian has volunteered Stevee | 4-Jan-10 1:23 |
| 3386 | BrianH | Yeah, the only barrier to entry into REBOL development will be the need to have a running version of REBOL :) | 4-Jan-10 1:22 |
| 3385 | Steeve | Brian, who is currently working on a new chat client ? You annouced that several times but... | 4-Jan-10 1:21 |
| 3384 | joannak | A bit stange system (adding chartinto programming language).. but if it works. | 4-Jan-10 1:20 |
| 3383 | Steeve | ? | 4-Jan-10 1:20 |
| 3382 | BrianH | We're trying to make DevBase more accessible too, with better clients. | 4-Jan-10 1:20 |
| 3381 | BrianH | CHAT in this case just being the function that brings up a DevBase client - it doesn't even implement the client itself. | 4-Jan-10 1:19 |
| 3380 | BrianH | Reichart, CHAT shouldn't be a barrier to entry. We are trying to make it more accessible. | 4-Jan-10 1:17 |
| 3379 | BrianH | Works in R3 too. | 4-Jan-10 1:16 |
| 3378 | BrianH | Thanks for testing that :) | 4-Jan-10 1:15 |
| 3377 | joannak | I checked the result on 2.7.7 and A was as it shoudl be 42 .. If it had been anything else I woudl have noted it as a Bug .. | 4-Jan-10 1:15 |
| 3376 | BrianH | That's the plan, at least :) | 4-Jan-10 1:14 |
| 3375 | BrianH | After this month the plan is for "R3 chat" to be an obsolete term, since R2 will have it too. Just "chat" I suppose, or DevBase. | 4-Jan-10 1:14 |
| 3374 | BrianH | Joanna, the reason for that is that REBOL has 3 different types of function arguments, and they have different evaluation rules. If you want to know how an expression should evaluate you need to know what kind of argument it will be going into, if any. The first expression evaluated is the one that returns the function value, the a expression in your example. Once that expression is evaluated it no longer matters what is assigned to 'a, since the function to be called is now referenced by DO. | 4-Jan-10 1:12 |
| 3373 | Steeve | ;-) | 4-Jan-10 1:11 |
| 3372 | Steeve | same meaning here | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3371 | Reichart | Steeve... | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3370 | Steeve | clique = to click = to make sound | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3369 | Reichart | Steve, yes, but...many words in English are French, that does not mean they are used the same way. So I think it wise to post this just in case... | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3368 | joannak | *hush* :-) | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3367 | BrianH | REBOL is big in France :) | 4-Jan-10 1:10 |
| 3366 | Steeve | clique is a french word Reichart ;-) | 4-Jan-10 1:09 |
| 3365 | BrianH | That's why we have two wikis, so the manual can become more official, like a book. We only want answers in the manual. We have other places for questions: The community wiki, chat, CureCode. | 4-Jan-10 1:09 |
| 3364 | Reichart | (for the European's here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clique) | 4-Jan-10 1:07 |
| 3363 | Graham | It's spam protection | 4-Jan-10 1:07 |
| 3362 | BrianH | That is what the community-run site is for. | 4-Jan-10 1:07 |
| 3361 | Reichart | When REBOL is no longer a clique, more people will will feel like they are "welcome" to join in. | 4-Jan-10 1:07 |
| 3360 | Reichart | Shame... to much of a barrier to entry. Rather, everyone should be allowed to post anything. A moderator should be able to push stuff to some "sideline" (not delete though). This will simply keep the s/n high. | 4-Jan-10 1:06 |
| 3359 | BrianH | Anyone with an R3 chat account with enough rank can update the official manual. You get rank by knowing what you're talking about and not being a jerk who wants to mess things up. Not difficult criteria to achieve, so far. | 4-Jan-10 1:04 |
| 3358 | BrianH | There is also a community-run MediaWiki site at http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Main_Page | 4-Jan-10 1:02 |
| 3357 | Reichart | Yes, the first one was exactly what I was looking for. So can anyone update this wiki? | 4-Jan-10 1:01 |
| 3356 | BrianH | For R3 the wiki is at http://rebol.com/r3/docs/ - for R2 it will likely be at http://rebol.com/r2/docs/ when it's done this month. | 4-Jan-10 1:00 |
| 3355 | BrianH | The plan or the finished product? | 4-Jan-10 0:59 |
| 3354 | Reichart | Cool, can you post a link to that? | 4-Jan-10 0:58 |
| 3353 | BrianH | Reichart, we did that for R3 already, and it is one of the plans for the next month for R2. Thanks for pointing out that the changes doc needs to be in the R2 manual wiki as well. | 4-Jan-10 0:58 |
| 3352 | BrianH | Sorry, hit the wrong key | 4-Jan-10 0:56 |
| 3351 | BrianH | Joanna, the reason for that is that REBOL has 3 different types of argument | 4-Jan-10 0:55 |
| 3350 | Reichart | How about start by taking this current entire HTML doc from Carl, and simply turn it into a WIKI. If he give his permission, then it is that easy. | 4-Jan-10 0:55 |
| 3349 | BrianH | Yeah, that's why we've started doing so. Two, one official one for the manuals, one community one. | 4-Jan-10 0:54 |
| 3348 | Reichart | This is a great example of where these docs NEED to be a WIKI! Then we can come along and break this down, give more than one example, and put notes and dicussion (chat) with it. | 4-Jan-10 0:48 |
| 3347 | joannak | Good example of short simple goodie that will twist oneīs mind if one has not used to things like lisp, sheme and forth.. It took me a moment to realize what's the point in this one. but I think I got it..
a: func [x] [print x]
b: func [] [a: 42]
a b As found from http://www.rebol.com/docs/changes.html at section 3.8 | 3-Jan-10 22:02 |
| 3346 | Gregg | I occasionally forget how refreshing REBOL is. As soon as I have to work with somehting else, I remember. :-) | 29-Dec-09 19:52 |
| 3345 | joannak | It's refreshingly humiliating starting to get some clue how little I know about Rebol and related stuff (AltMe for example) .. :-) | 29-Dec-09 3:17 |
| 3344 | Ladislav | Shadwolf: "all the scrpts made accross the 10 last years usng REbl 2 wll then not be usable with R3" - if that is a statement, than it is demonstrably false | 28-Dec-09 10:34 |
| 3343 | Ladislav | Joanna: "My point behind this forward/backward compatibility chat is primarly, that I'd like to see a way to stop average user on accidently loading old scripts on R3." - this issue already exists even in R2 - there already are scripts, that work in older versions of R2, but not in the newest one (ask Peter, how many of his tests have problems in the latest R2), and, vice versa, some scripts written for the newest R2 don't work in older versions | 28-Dec-09 10:31 |
| 3342 | PeterWood | The 824 tests are unit tests of the production Rebol.org system which still runs in 2.5.6. So in that sense they are biased in favour of 2.5.6. My point was that many of them still work unchanged under R3. The two main reasons that I started to build the Rebol.org unit tests was that they would help stop bugs being introduced when the code is enhanced and also help when it comes time to upgrade the version of Rebol that Rebol.org uses. Sadly, I haven't written anywhere near the number of tests yet to reach my objectives. (By the way, I wrote most of the tests before R3 was announced; I've recently converted them to a test framewoirk that also runs under R3.) | 28-Dec-09 10:28 |
| 3341 | Ladislav | Peter: "All 824 pass under 2.5.6." - then I would say, that the tests are biased in favour of R2 2.5.6, since I have lots of tests failing in 2.5.6 | 28-Dec-09 10:20 |
| 3340 | joannak | Suanda, it was partially your article (alongside CS Rebol3 blog) that got me wondering loud about potential need of tools/flag/tag related to R2/R3 differences. I'll move some thougths about this to Advocacy. | 27-Dec-09 22:58 |
| 3339 | Steeve | the scalability is also linked to the compacness. | 27-Dec-09 22:18 |
| 3338 | Graham | Or, you'll have a job for life! | 27-Dec-09 22:16 |
| 3337 | Graham | if your code is not maintainable it will not be re-used either. | 27-Dec-09 22:15 |
| 3336 | Steeve | but at some point, if your code is too slow and too huge, it will not be reused, so that you'll lost your investment | 27-Dec-09 22:12 |
| 3335 | Graham | machine cycles are cheap .. brain cycles expensive | 27-Dec-09 22:10 |
| 3334 | Graham | if your code is slow, can always speed it up by running a faster cpu :) | 27-Dec-09 22:08 |
| 3333 | Steeve | i was discussing about "writing easy to understand mezzanine" again "compact and fast but maybe hard to understand mezzanines" | 27-Dec-09 22:06 |
| 3332 | Graham | Seems to contradict the idea of using the least powerful language ... | 27-Dec-09 22:04 |
| 3331 | Steeve | (sorry, wrong thread) | 27-Dec-09 22:03 |
| 3330 | Steeve | Well my motto is a little different. "structural complexity allows functional simplicity" Wich means, more you make your code compact and fast , more your code is reused. | 27-Dec-09 22:02 |
| 3329 | Graham | Is this based on a small sample of your own scripts? Any largish scripts tested yet? | 27-Dec-09 21:55 |
| 3328 | Sunanda | Many non View scripts will be portable with no, or little, change. This article discusses my earlier conversion experiences: http://www.rebol.org/art-display-article.r?article=j26z | 27-Dec-09 19:59 |
| 3327 | shadwolf | all the scrpts made accross the 10 last years usng REbl 2 wll then not be usable with R3 ... Ans this have been discussed lke 2 years ago when carl proposed to do a major verson upgrade that was wth the discuton arund the "Because no one knows it do i change rebol's name ?". It was sad to say that rebol after 10 yeas was stll in the underground limbus.... | 27-Dec-09 18:30 |
| 3326 | shadwolf | other problem is the retro portablity .... | 27-Dec-09 18:28 |
| 3325 | joannak | I do admit I have not searched trough old posts (blogs, vikis, archives. whtever is available) to see if this is obviously an old issue (and not necessary to talk again?). | 27-Dec-09 18:08 |
| 3324 | joannak | My point behind this forward/backward compatibility chat is primarly, that I'd like to see a way to stop average user on accidently loading old scripts on R3. I'm sure the top-100 gurus of Rebol can dance their way around differences at will, but at the moment R3 (and R3/view) is released there will (hopefully) be considerable number of new users for Rebol. Secondary would be giving an idea of a toolkit ( lint like script for Rebol or perhaps some debug-mode at runtime? ) that would allow developer to see which parts of the code needs to checked/rewritten for R3 compatibility. | 27-Dec-09 18:03 |
| 3323 | joannak | Thatīs true. but I tend to belive it will be highly unlikely there will be as much important groundbraking changes on moving from 3.0 to 3.1 as is from 2.6 to 3.0. | 27-Dec-09 17:20 |
| 3322 | Paul | The problem I do see with using REBOL3 is that you then need to use REBOL3.1 etc... as new versions come out. | 27-Dec-09 16:02 |
| 3321 | Paul | I don't really have a problem with the REBOL3 way. It seems this was discussed before and some valid concerns were raised but I don't recall what they were. | 27-Dec-09 16:00 |
| 3320 | Paul | So needs would be used with Stamp as this: REBOL [ Title: "My Coolest Program" version: 1.0 Stamp: 'R3 Needs: [2.0 ODBC] ] | 27-Dec-09 15:53 |
| 3319 | joannak | Id rather see it like REBOL3[ Normal headers here, as much as you feel the need ] | 27-Dec-09 15:53 |
| 3318 | Paul | Or I should say execution requirements of the script. | 27-Dec-09 15:51 |
| 3317 | Paul | Those items should be separated from the version requirements. | 27-Dec-09 15:51 |
| 3316 | Paul | I don't think Needs should be used for the version requirement but for external needs. | 27-Dec-09 15:50 |
| 3315 | Geomol | There is no such way. Some scripts work for many versions of REBOL, some don't. A way to tell is to use the NEEDS entry in the headers. See:
http://www.rebol.com/docs/core23/rebolcore-5.html#section-2 But it's not widely used. | 27-Dec-09 15:48 |
| 3314 | Paul | I don't think there is currently. The community should decide on the best method though. I think simply changing the extension could be useful such as .r3 Other languages use extensions to differ between code version such as .c verses .cpp However, another method is simply to put a stamp message in the header such as: REBOL [ Title: "My coolest Program" Stamp: R3 ] | 27-Dec-09 15:47 |
| 3313 | joannak | So, I'd like to ask if there is any sureproof way of telling apart which scripts are for R3 and which are for older Rebols? This may indeed be obvious question, but I try to ask these now as long as I can cause I'd expect these to be asked a lot by the time R3 is released. | 27-Dec-09 15:29 |
| 3312 | PeterWood | So Joanna, if you make sure that you always use UTF-8 encoding with Rebol 2 you should find few problems in later migrating to Rebol 3. | 27-Dec-09 5:28 |
| 3311 | PeterWood | From the liitle time I've spent looking at the rebol.org system in respect of converting it to R3, the code changes required seem to be very small (I've only looked at the cgi and core code, no View or VID). The biggest problem would seem to be the need to change the source code to UTF-8. MUch of the rebol.org code is pretty old and was written without attention to string encoding. The newer code is mainly ISO-8859-1 "aware" and seems to be ISO-8859-1encoded. Some of the Rebol.org code won't load in R3 because it contains invalid UTF-8 characters. Changing the source encoding is trivial but with that comes the need to change all the data stored in Rebol.org to UTF-8 for it to be processed properly. | 27-Dec-09 5:25 |
| 3310 | PeterWood | Some data on R2 -> R3 conversions. I have 824 unit tests for Rebol.org that which can be run on both Core 2.5.6 and the latest R3 Alpha. All 824 pass under 2.5.6. Under R3, 670 pass and 154 fail. The tests only cover 32 functions (out of the hundreds if not thousands in the Library system). 13 of the functions will require changes to run under R3, 19 won't/ | 27-Dec-09 5:17 |
| 3309 | BrianH | That's R3 though. | 27-Dec-09 3:25 |
| 3308 | BrianH | parse [-1] [lit -1] | 27-Dec-09 3:25 |
| 3307 | joannak | Reminds me of those old days I used to whack together some nasty stuff with sed and awk ... Thankfully I have forgotten most of those. :) | 27-Dec-09 0:08 |
| 3306 | joannak | Just got the feeling.. was reading Wikibook.. Got this line (ok, it was explained, but still) parse [-1] [1 1 -1] | 27-Dec-09 0:05 |
| 3305 | Henrik | I helped starting the wikibook before R3 was announced. When R3 was announced, I though "well, damn, we'll have to start over, when R3 is out in a couple of months." :-) | 26-Dec-09 23:47 |
| 3304 | BrianH | Oh, never ming, you;re referring to the wikibook. | 26-Dec-09 23:28 |
| 3303 | BrianH | "was" ? :) | 26-Dec-09 23:27 |
| 3302 | Graham | That was a community written book ... different purpose | 26-Dec-09 23:25 |
| 3301 | BrianH | Too many. We're trying to move that stuff into DocBase (for community stuff) and the manual (for official stuff). | 26-Dec-09 23:16 |
| 3300 | joannak | Aheemm.. How many different sites have these docs? officlas, unofficials, new old antiqued ? | 26-Dec-09 23:15 |
| 3299 | Ladislav | Joanna, not that it is an easy reading, but..., did you look at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming/Language_Features/Parse | 26-Dec-09 23:14 |
| 3298 | Ladislav | :-D | 26-Dec-09 23:12 |
| 3297 | joannak | And I feel need of Huge set of examples and cookbooks just for the new parser.. (plus couple asperins) | 26-Dec-09 23:12 |
| 3296 | Ladislav | In other words, you are at the guru side too, Pekr | 26-Dec-09 23:11 |
| 3295 | Pekr | still the auto break from infinite loop with 'some ... is ... insane ... | 26-Dec-09 23:10 |
| 3294 | BrianH | All of the real parsing gurus are happy that while was added, and all of the parsing newbies will stick to any and some :) | 26-Dec-09 23:09 |
| 3293 | Ladislav | errata: Same replace by Some | 26-Dec-09 23:06 |
| 3292 | Ladislav | The most recent Parse finding is probably CureCode #1401, which serves as a proof, that While is more "universal/fundamental" than Any (or Same), which may be found "crippled" in some situations, just because it "knows better than the user what to do" - I personally hate such software and am happy we convinced Carl to at least introduce the While keyword/operator. | 26-Dec-09 23:06 |
| 3291 | Ladislav | But, anyway, I like the result so far. | 26-Dec-09 23:03 |
| 3290 | Ladislav | Yes, although there is a possibility, that a new requirement/need appears. | 26-Dec-09 23:01 |
| 3289 | BrianH | Which is happily over :) | 26-Dec-09 23:00 |
| 3288 | Ladislav | Re the practicality: a good Parse dialect may be very practical (can be used to implement dialects, parse texts, match various patterns, etc.), but, at the same time, the design of it is rather a theoretical task. | 26-Dec-09 22:55 |
| 3287 | Ladislav | To make you feel better: there are at least 20 proposals in the article I personally don't mind about (alternatives, that weren't chosen, as well as some keywords I do not plan to use). | 26-Dec-09 22:52 |
| 3286 | BrianH | The parsing model of R3 is based on a theory that didn't exist when I was last in college :) | 26-Dec-09 22:50 |
| 3285 | joannak | As a practical ... I ment things like Embedded, measurement & control with some asm+c code, self-made wireless protocols etc.. Of those I know something (and got my masterīs degree). | 26-Dec-09 22:50 |
| 3284 | Ladislav | Well, the attempt was to define the dialect to be as practical as possible, which certainly isn't an easy task. | 26-Dec-09 22:47 |
| 3283 | joannak | And I''ve never been so much on theory side.. I've preferered practical things.. | 26-Dec-09 22:46 |
| 3282 | Ladislav | Right, some things may be newer, than what you learned at the university | 26-Dec-09 22:44 |
| 3281 | Steeve | Not sure it helps | 26-Dec-09 22:43 |
| 3280 | joannak | nah.. I think I just need to stretch my brains a bit and try to remember those things I did learn at the Uni years ago.. | 26-Dec-09 22:41 |
| 3279 | Ladislav | You can certainly ask, if something is unclear to you in that page. | 26-Dec-09 22:40 |
| 3278 | joannak | As a half.funny sidenote. I was reading http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Parse_Project and there is comment about people having CompSci degrees.. I have one, and I still feel a bit dumb ... | 26-Dec-09 22:38 |
| 3277 | Ladislav | Or even Reduce, if you have Do/next. | 26-Dec-09 22:38 |
| 3276 | Ladislav | But, the same applies to the Compose function, it can be implemented as a mezzanine too. | 26-Dec-09 22:37 |
| 3275 | Ladislav | In fact, the Inline function can be implemented as a mezzanine, which would serve as a proof, that you can do without it, if you wish. | 26-Dec-09 22:36 |
| 3274 | Steeve | ahah, a lighter syntax ? | 26-Dec-09 22:35 |
| 3273 | Ladislav | The answer to your question is dead simple: nothing. | 26-Dec-09 22:34 |
| 3272 | Steeve | To be honest Ladislav, i don't see the interset of the INLINE function. What can be done with INLINE, we can't to currently ? | 26-Dec-09 22:33 |
| 3271 | Ladislav | Well, Compose is not comfortable. More comfortable replacements were proposed at http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Replacement . | 26-Dec-09 22:22 |
| 3270 | Steeve | i'm not sure it's easy. The flow of GUI events is drived very differently. It's could be a burden to simulate the R2 behavior. | 26-Dec-09 22:21 |
| 3269 | Graham | 'Compose was an addition to get round some awkwardness ... | 26-Dec-09 22:21 |
| 3268 | joannak | Brian: I noticed that I had earlier (ears ago) missed the Rebol word Compose entirely.. No wonder some things seemd to be ackward.. | 26-Dec-09 22:20 |
| 3267 | Henrik | yes, it might be possible. there were also talks about emulating VID at some point. maybe that's better left for a hobby project. | 26-Dec-09 22:16 |
| 3266 | Ladislav | I bet, that it would be easy to port the old VID from R2, to R3, but it is unlikely, that anybody would want to do it. | 26-Dec-09 22:15 |
| 3265 | Henrik | What I mean about lacking compatibility: Things like ports are totally different, so we can't directly port protocols. They have to be rewritten. VID is also an entirely new system that bears little resemblance to the original VID. AFAIK using DLLs is also very different. But of course many functions may work the same, even if they are rewritten underneath. | 26-Dec-09 22:10 |
| 3264 | BrianH | It might be easier to get this than it is to get Lisp. Lisp says that code is data, but it isn't necessarily so. Code realli *is* data in REBOL, at runtime, and the whole language is bilt around it. Once you get that it's amazing how easy the rest gets. | 26-Dec-09 22:08 |
| 3263 | Steeve | mostly, speed-up improvements. except for 2 functions AFAIK. Do you know which ones guys ? (Brian, you don't play :-) | 26-Dec-09 22:07 |
| 3262 | joannak | Steeve: well, sometimes things take time.. It took me decade (or was it two) before I got <build does> .more or less right. And I still don't get Lisp.. (nor have I tried it in years).. | 26-Dec-09 22:05 |
| 3261 | Ladislav | Joanna asked about the forward compatibility: R2->R3. There is quite decent backward compatibility (R3->R2), as BrianH is proving, and, of course, the forward compatibility is even better. | 26-Dec-09 22:04 |
| 3260 | BrianH | Naw, that's not it. That wouldn't explain the stuff that can't be easily backported without rewriting REBOL from scratch. | 26-Dec-09 22:02 |
| 3259 | Graham | must be cause R2 is Turing complete | 26-Dec-09 22:00 |
| 3258 | BrianH | Plus there is a project to backport some of the R3 improvements to R2 so you can use some of the fun new toys. A project I should get back to soon, I might add. Some things won't be compatible but it's amazing how much can be made to work. | 26-Dec-09 21:58 |
| 3257 | Steeve | the time invested in learning R2 is not lost when you switch to R3. Just avoid to pass to much time on GUI aspects and Ports handling, they are/will-be completly redisigned. | 26-Dec-09 21:55 |
| 3256 | BrianH | A good idea that, especially once we get out of alpha and things stop changing so much. Most of the core semantic changes have gone through already - current development focus is in areas with no corresponding concepts in R2. We'll see how much the multitasking affects things, and the proposed object! changes. | 26-Dec-09 21:55 |
| 3255 | Ladislav | Well, OK, may have been too harsh, sorry, I just don't like unsourced statements like the above. | 26-Dec-09 21:54 |
| 3254 | Steeve | There's no comparison draft; if it's what you're asking | 26-Dec-09 21:51 |
| 3253 | joannak | Well.. The fact of life is that *if* you can find an computer system (even officially stadartized programming language) that works exactly the same 10 (or more) years, it's development obviously must have ended.. 100% backward compatibility is totally impossible, question is how well the situation is handled, documented etc.. | 26-Dec-09 21:48 |
| 3252 | BrianH | Be nice, boys :) | 26-Dec-09 21:45 |
| 3251 | Ladislav | Even if such a statement was correct, I insist, that mine is correct too: uninformed and unsourced opinion.l | 26-Dec-09 20:07 |
| 3250 | Ladislav | Wrong, it is you who stated something without trying | 26-Dec-09 20:02 |
| 3249 | Pekr | But I have no problem standing corrected :-) | 26-Dec-09 15:30 |
| 3248 | Pekr | I did not tell that porting would be difficult, but I better try to tell ppl, that simple do %my-r2-script.r in R3 might not work right away ... | 26-Dec-09 15:29 |
| 3247 | Pekr | Ladislav? Really? So just go and try rebol.org submissions, one by one, and then tell me, how many of them actually will work ... | 26-Dec-09 15:28 |
| 3246 | Ladislav | Yes, there is a difference in Pick behaviour, but keep in mind, that behaviour is different only in exceptional cases | 26-Dec-09 15:09 |
| 3245 | joannak | Hmm I need to read some things again to be sure I have even got it right.. (and I'm sure this is issue that has been wel discussed. before, sorry) | 26-Dec-09 15:08 |
| 3244 | joannak | I have no plans on jumping into R3 at this point, since there are so much even on R2 I need to learn. But for the future reference, is there any plan for a tool (or mode in Rebol itself) to help Flagging out those R2->3 differences... For example, I remember seeing that PICK works differently on R3 (right, unlike R2 which is offsetted by one), it'll be quite hard to spot all those from source alone, since parameters are often defined at runtime? Some changes will of course be obvious (for spotting), like sockets, since their parameters have been canged a lot. but difference on data readiding/writing (ascii/binary/unicode etc) may hide itself quite a while. | 26-Dec-09 14:54 |
| 3243 | Ladislav | How many scripts did you try to port? | 26-Dec-09 14:53 |
| 3242 | Ladislav | "...most script will not work..." - an uninformed and unsourced opinion | 26-Dec-09 14:52 |
| 3241 | Pekr | most R2 script will work unchanged. There were, however, some changes to VID over time, so older VID scripts might not work with newer VID (View) engines. As for R2 to R3, Henrik is right - most scripts will not work ... | 26-Dec-09 14:46 |
| 3240 | Henrik | R3 is not very compatible with R2 | 26-Dec-09 14:38 |
| 3239 | joannak | Thanks, Iīll do so when I have something spesific in mind.. I was wondering how much Rebol has changed in last 10 or so years, in a sense that If I find an neat script what are chances it still works as itīs shoudl be. At the moment I have this feeling that this current v2 Rebol shoudl be bit more compatible than upcoming V3 ? | 26-Dec-09 13:56 |
| 3238 | Pekr | joanna - the best aproach is to probably ask here. We have few old-time rebollers here, who might remember some gems. One of them being me for e.g. OTOH - sometimes I am surprised, I can find real gems in rebol.org archive. So - rebol.org, google, ask on mailing list or here on AltME ... | 26-Dec-09 12:39 |
| 3237 | joannak | One thing that I noticed (an obviously *doh* moment) is that it's hard not to accidently start trying to reinvent the wheel with Rebol programs. There are so many excellent tools, utilities, and games allready made.. Question is more ofthem than not, where do I find whatīs been made, how well itīs been kept updates etc.? | 26-Dec-09 12:17 |
| 3236 | Graham | or ~humor | 23-Dec-09 8:08 |
| 3235 | Fork | moving to Chat, I guess? | 23-Dec-09 8:08 |
| 3234 | Graham | Personally i think we need more web boards ... and not this dark net stuff | 23-Dec-09 8:07 |
| 3233 | Fork | And my favorite is wiki. Now here we are -- you want to recategorize. How do you? | 23-Dec-09 8:07 |
| 3232 | Fork | I'll talk wherever. But I was just going to speak about preferred mediums of communication. Carl has his, I have mine, y'all have yours, etc. | 23-Dec-09 8:07 |
| 3231 | Sunanda | [Pehaps this discussion belongs more naturally in the Advocacy group, rather than a newcomers' questions group] | 23-Dec-09 8:06 |
| 3230 | Fork | Well, he wrote a lot, but there are still only 80. | 23-Dec-09 8:06 |
| 3229 | Graham | Someone posting rebol questions has been accused of spaming ... | 23-Dec-09 8:05 |
| 3228 | Graham | cough cough ... | 23-Dec-09 8:04 |
| 3227 | Fork | So I am new, and I am also not that new. I'd like to propose that Rebol embrace visibility in new mediums, like StackOverflow. Anyone with an RSS reader might want to subscribe to the latest Rebol-related questions: http://stackoverflow.com/feeds/tag?tagnames=rebol&sort=newest | 23-Dec-09 8:01 |
| 3226 | Fork | But in the interim I'd lost my AltME password, and Rebol's community had become something of a moving target anyway. So I looked at R3 chat. | 23-Dec-09 7:54 |
| 3225 | Fork | I got the help to make the enum work out here, on AltME, from some of you -- you may remember that. | 23-Dec-09 7:52 |
| 3224 | Fork | Earlier this year I started a project to take every single scrap of idea that I'd ever had or project I'd started and push it to some state of completion. So I tripped across that code, and decided to clean it up and submit it to the rebol code archive. | 23-Dec-09 7:51 |
| 3223 | Fork | I was introduced to Rebol a couple of years ago to look at a codebase written in it, and to address the first bug I found in that codebase I decided to see "what it would take" to write an enumerated type: http://hostilefork.com/2009/06/13/enumerated-type-for-rebol2/ | 23-Dec-09 7:49 |
| 3222 | Fork | Hello again all, I'm BrianD (but be glad that's not my alias or it would make the Wiki back-and-forth with BrianH even harder to read). | 23-Dec-09 7:46 |
| 3221 | Gregg | Yeah, R2 isn't great for creating "slick" interfaces without the use of graphics. Use can draw text with anti-alias, but most scripts just do things the easy way. The pencil icon is handy as well, so you can use ctrl+s to send. I imagine you've already done that, but for others listening in... | 22-Dec-09 19:01 |
| 3220 | joannak | Well.. It's not a biggie. Was just something a noob wanting to evalluate Rebol might miss. :-) Also I finally found a way to make text bigger on AltME window.. With todayīs screens the default is a bit smallish. | 22-Dec-09 14:07 |
| 3219 | Henrik | This is not likely to be fixed. REBOL 2.7.x low level systems are probably not maintained anymore. | 22-Dec-09 13:56 |
| 3218 | joannak | Ah well. I found the reason for one big cosmetical issue with this 2.7.6 ... It has been documented with solution at: http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=4004& I would like to point out one detail missing from that RAMBO; font smooth type change requires system restart to be effective. | 22-Dec-09 12:59 |
| 3217 | Henrik | The UI is far from done, though. | 22-Dec-09 11:55 |
| 3216 | joannak | I did DL R3 and run the gfx-view Demo on it. Looks really nice, for example fonts seem to render much better than on REBOL/View 2.7.6.3.1 -- for some reason this seems to mess especially badly with bolded characters. | 22-Dec-09 11:54 |
| 3215 | Gregg | R2 still has a few lingering issues, but development hasn't stopped on it. The focus now is on R3, but the community at large is still kind of on the sidelines. Carl and a core group are working on key elements, including the host interface release and extension model. Depending on when you last looked at R2, there may be some new things there for you to find as well. | 22-Dec-09 1:30 |
| 3214 | joannak | Oh thanks.. I'm not even sure what I seek at the moment, just got the feeling I need to check whatīs cooking with Rebol these days. | 22-Dec-09 0:13 |
| 3213 | Geomol | I hope, you find what you seek here. And don't be afraid to ask, there are many nice and helpful people here. | 21-Dec-09 23:52 |
| 3212 | Geomol | Hello, and welcome! | 21-Dec-09 23:51 |
| 3211 | joannak | Just quick hello.. I'm totally new to AltME and have used Rebol only years ago. I was somewhat active at older mailing list nearly ten years ago, but various things happened and Rebol was not among top priorities.. since things have changed quite a lot .. | 21-Dec-09 23:50 |
| 3210 | Gabriele | You could use my async-call code :-) | 8-Dec-09 10:33 |
| 3209 | Will | 300ms is a LOT of time for webapps, it would be really appreciated if a build without that limitation could be made available, Thank you Gabriele for taking care 8-) | 7-Dec-09 16:24 |
| 3208 | Gabriele | (I think Carl once published the code for CALL... I need to find it and have a look.) | 7-Dec-09 13:01 |
| 3207 | Gabriele | 300 ms: maybe there's a hardcoded "wait" for the other process to start, or something like that. it seems to be too much consistent to just be the shell startup time. | 7-Dec-09 13:00 |
| 3206 | Gabriele | Geomol: i'm not entirely sure why the docs say that, i think it always worked for me. | 7-Dec-09 12:59 |
| 3205 | Izkata | strange that it's .3s, though | 6-Dec-09 18:17 |
| 3204 | Izkata | *Waiting on new process (instead of returning immediately) *Process must run and end (launching of the shell, shell interprets string, etc) *Process must be reaped *Possibly other stuff >> time [call/wait {}] 1 == 0:00:00.300538 >> time [call {}] 1 == 0:00:00.010613 | 6-Dec-09 18:17 |
| 3203 | Geomol | Also on mine under OS X: >> time [call/wait ""] == 0:00:00.308834 | 6-Dec-09 14:39 |
| 3202 | Will | why does call have a pretty fixed 300 ms delay? Is it a coincidense on my machine or is it enforced somewhere? timer [call/wait ""] ; 0:00:00.301991 | 6-Dec-09 13:12 |
| 3201 | Will | from the rename help:
ARGUMENTS:
old -- path to the old file (Type: file url)
new -- new name (not a path) (Type: file url string) but it indeed works if you use a destination path relative to the origin path, in my case 0.002 seconds instead of 0.300 using call "mv.. thanks all 8-) | 6-Dec-09 12:48 |
| 3200 | Izkata | Just checked, it correctly moved a text file from one directory to another on Ubuntu | 6-Dec-09 10:38 |
| 3199 | Geomol | Ah, can't be used for what Will is after.! "This function cannot be used to move a file from one directory to another. " | 6-Dec-09 10:37 |
| 3198 | Geomol | It's right there in the dictionary, under "Port, File, and IO Functions": http://www.rebol.com/docs/dictionary.html | 6-Dec-09 9:42 |
| 3197 | Geomol | I'm puzzled, I could miss that. :-) Thanks, Gabriele! | 6-Dec-09 9:41 |
| 3196 | Gabriele | if that fails (different filesystems), you need the usual copy + delete. (MV does the same.) | 6-Dec-09 9:20 |
| 3195 | Gabriele | RENAME | 6-Dec-09 9:19 |
| 3194 | NickA | You could use write/read then delete | 5-Dec-09 13:57 |
| 3193 | Geomol | I haven't come across such a file move function. I guess, you need to call the operating system. | 5-Dec-09 12:59 |
| 3192 | Will | is there a way to move a file from one path to another without copying? or should I use call "mv ... ? thank you! | 5-Dec-09 12:11 |
| 3191 | Maxim | I'm no rebgui user, but I can tell you there is a rebgui group here. maybe you can find your answer there :-) the best way to search for stuff is to use the altme web archive on rebol.org, cause it includes even the old posts. Altme limits back log to make the GUI more responsive. the rebgui Atlme archive on rebol.org: http://www.rebol.org/aga-display-posts.r?post=r3wp303x1 | 1-Nov-09 5:13 |
| 3190 | PeterG | I want to capture on-key events while a table widget has focus. I tried using " on-click [system/view/focal-face: face system/view/caret: face/text] on-key [print event/key] " as the user-guide suggests for non-editable widgets, but all I got was a crash. Any suggestions? | 31-Oct-09 21:17 |
| 3189 | PeterG | Hi folks! Quick newbie question about rebgui: | 31-Oct-09 21:15 |
| 3188 | mhinson | [Tumble weed] | 24-Sep-09 22:06 |
| 3187 | BrianH | Yup :) | 5-Jul-09 0:24 |
| 3186 | Graham | so out side the base, one is essentially in Rod Serling's home .... | 5-Jul-09 0:23 |
| 3185 | BrianH | They don't define time zones in Antarctica, afaik - they just define the bases' operating time, not the local time in the area. But as you say, afaik is not very far. | 5-Jul-09 0:21 |
| 3184 | Graham | I think your statement about "all Antarctic bases ... " is a tad off! | 5-Jul-09 0:20 |