r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

onetom
20-Apr-2011
[1263]
the change history of what? r3 file storage?
BrianH
20-Apr-2011
[1264x3]
Revisions to R2/Forward since the initial release to DevBase.
There is a similar bug in many of the R3 mezzanine control functions 
(the opposite, actually), but fortunately most of R2's mezzanine 
control functions were converted to native in R3, so the bug doesn't 
affect much.
The revised mezz-series.r (relative to the 2.7.8 SDK source) is in 
R3 chat #8008 - that's the number of the particular version, which 
you can see by going to #41 (R2/Mezzanines) and doing a LF command.
onetom
20-Apr-2011
[1267]
these numbers are like the memory locations in home computers... 
spectrum, c64 (i didn't have an amiga..) in DOS 8000 was the HDD 
bios start, i think..
BrianH
20-Apr-2011
[1268]
The chat interface uses numbers as a deliberate design choice because 
it is easier to memorize and refer to a number than it is to a path 
or message ID. You can even write a message number in #8008 form 
in another message and it can be followed like a hyperlink to the 
message of that number. You can also do the hyperlink trich to CureCode 
tickets using the bug#539 form, which will take you to http://issue.cc/r3/539
(that R3 bug I mentioned above).
GrahamC
26-Apr-2011
[1269]
Anyone have this ? http://www.fm.tul.cz/~ladislav/rebol/peekpoke.r

It's not on Ladislav's site anymore at that url
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1270x3]
Is there a point in allowing refinements like this?

/1a
REBOL also allow decimal! refinements like:

/1.2

but treat it like an integer refinement.


Some further thoughts: Can refinements be categorized in two groups, 
integer refinements and word refinements? If yes, then the refinement 
datatype maybe should be two different datatypes?
Hm, maybe what I call integer refinements shouldn't be allowed at 
all, as I see no point in them. I can't get the desired path using 
integer refinements as in:

>> to-path [blk /2]
== blk//2

The correct way is:

>> to-path [blk 2]
== blk/2

So if integer refinements are useless, what's the point?
Rebolek
26-Apr-2011
[1273]
John, I'm not sure I understand. Aren't you confusing path with refinement?
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1274x3]
No, they're different. I know. You can use refinements to build paths, 
else refinements are used in functions. REBOL allow what I call integer 
refinements, as the scanner doesn't give error. I ask why is that?
Or, maybe we can't actually use refinements to build paths, now I 
think of it. :-)
I can cook it down to: Why would REBOL allow refinements like:

/1
/1a
/1.2


My guess is, it's a side effect of how the scanner handle paths with 
integers, like: blk/1

So shouldn't refinements have the same rules as words, like the core 
manual suggest?
Rebolek
26-Apr-2011
[1277]
Ah, now I understand. It's probably a "bug" in scanner.
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1278x3]
Because those refinements are allowed, you can write:

f: func [/2] [ ... ]

But that kinda makes no sense.
No kidden, people get confused:

>> f: func [/2] [if 2 [print "It's 2!"]]
>> f
It's 2!
>> f/2
It's 2!

I can even write

>> f/3
It's 2!
In R3, at least we get:

>> f: func [/2] [if 2 [print "It's 2!"]]
>> f
It's 2!
>> f/2
** Script error: incompatible refinement: 2

But the refinement is still valid.
Ladislav
26-Apr-2011
[1281]
Graham, see:

http://www.fm.tul.cz/~ladislav/rebol/library-utils.r
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1282]
I'm having problems renaming a file on a USB stick with R2 under 
Windows. It reports "cannot access". R3 does not have this problem. 
Can anyone reproduce this?
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1283x2]
I did this under OS X with R2:

>> write %/Volumes/NICOM/test.txt "Testing..."
(and the files was produced, then)
>> rename %/Volumes/NICOM/test.txt %/Volumes/NICOM/test2.txt
** Access Error: Cannot rename test.txt

So an error.
With R3, it works here.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1285]
ok, that is interesting. possibly file system related?
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1286]
Possibly, as rename works on HD in R2.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1287]
the mezz source says that if the file is not found, then it can't 
be accessed.
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1288]
Henrik, I have no problem with renaming a file on USB stick...tested 
under WindowsXP SP3
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1289]
Henrik, I can read the file with REBOL command READ in R2.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1290x2]
perhaps it's a timing issue?
it works, if I open the port and find the file by hand
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1292]
>> read %/f/
== [%data %KeePass/ %TrueCrypt/ %autorun.inf %test.r]
>> rename %/f/test.r %test2.r
>> read %/f/
== [%data %KeePass/ %TrueCrypt/ %autorun.inf %test2.r]
>>
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1293]
RENAME uses OPEN, not READ.
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1294x2]
Seems like, it's the CHANGE command, that rename it.
Reading the source for RENAME, it rename the file by changing its 
name in the directory file. And this doesn't work for some reason 
with USB sticks under OS X using R2.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1296]
it does not work for me under Windows either. seems like a port bug.
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1297]
Cyphre, did you test with R2 or R3?
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1298]
and yes, it is at the CHANGE on the port, that fails.
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1299]
I tested with R2...no problems here. Henrik, maybe it has something 
to do with the fact you are emulating the Windows under OSX?
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1300x2]
the CHANGE works, if I do it by hand. Then I can rename the file.
Cyphre, Robert reported this from a customer, who I assume is running 
Windows natively.
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1302]
hmm, hard to say then.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1303x2]
testing one more timing issue...
does not help with timing, but I can still perform CHANGE outside 
the rename function
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1305]
It works, if you don't give NEW as full path.
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1306]
I see... testing that
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1307x2]
that's how the HELP is telling you ;)
new -- new name (not a path)
Geomol
26-Apr-2011
[1309x2]
:) funny it works on HD though.
Are you suggesting "RTFM!" ? ;)
Henrik
26-Apr-2011
[1311]
ok, thanks... testing fix.
Cyphre
26-Apr-2011
[1312]
LOL, well, I remember I have been bitten by this many years ago so 
from that time I'm using it according to the help ;)