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

World: r3wp

[RAMBO] The REBOL bug and enhancement database

Rondon
11-Oct-2005
[1271x11]
Hi Folks
I think that the http scheme the temporary redirection .. server 
error 307 is not at the rebol http_scheme.. the 302 is.. but not 
the 307..
if you try: page: read http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/opiniao/fz1010200501.htm
it will redirect you to another url from the browser..
but using Rebol, you can't get this new url..  as you could using 
page: open http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/opiniao/fz1010200501.htm
print page/url  or page/target
you know.. ;)
I think that the same procedure for 302 should be for the 307 server 
error
if you call from a browser it will redirect you to the following 
url: https://acesso.uol.com.br/login.html?dest=CONTENT&url=http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/opiniao/fz1010200501.htm&COD_PRODUTO=7
just for reference... http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.uk/~flavell/www/post-redirect.html
I think 307 is not returning the alternative URL.. you know..
Allen
11-Oct-2005
[1282]
RFC 2616
10.3.8 307 Temporary Redirect


   The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI.

   Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD

   continue to use the Request-URI for future requests.  This response

   is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header
   field.

   The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the

   response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the

   response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to
   the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not

   understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the

   information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on
   the new URI.


   If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other

   than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect 
   the

   request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might
   change the conditions under which the request was issued.
Rondon
11-Oct-2005
[1283]
So.. How Can I solve this Allen?
Gabriele
12-Oct-2005
[1284]
(Not tested.)

>> code: second get in system/schemes/http/handler 'open
== [
    port/locals: make object! [list: copy [] headers: none]

    generic-proxy?: all [port/proxy/type = 'generic not none? por...
>> actions: select code [response-actions:]
== [
    100 continue-post
    200 success
    201 success
    204 success
    206 success
    300 forward
    301 forward
 ...
>> insert tail actions reduce [307 select actions 300]
== []
Anton
12-Oct-2005
[1285x2]
Gabriele, regarding 
http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=3918&

I found my patches still cause visual artefacts in certain circumstances, 
so this report should be cancelled.
Sorry about that.

(It does demonstrate, at least, how to iterate PROGRESS style in 
a usable way, but I'll better publish that elsewhere.)
I will continue to try to understand the artefacting.
Rondon
17-Oct-2005
[1287x3]
Gabrielle, the 307 redirection solved the problem partially, if you 
try to read the url that I put above, you'll realize the problem..
when you try to read the redirected url.. it sends back a forbidden 
message.. it is common with the 307 that returns back also a 401 
message
I think that http scheme should behave as a browser in all aspects.. 
you know..  the http scheme is not complete to simulate all the browser 
functions.. :-( I mean, cookies, redirections etc
PhilB
18-Oct-2005
[1290]
Came across this at work today ....

REBOL/View 1.3.1.3.1 17-Jun-2005 Core 2.6.0

>> to integer! ""
== 0
>> to decimal! ""
** Script Error: Invalid argument:
** Near: to decimal! ""


Shouldnt that return 0 like to integer!   ??

Cant see anything in Rambo for it though ...
PeterWood
18-Oct-2005
[1291x2]
Must have crept in amongst  View 1.3 changes.

REBOL/Core 2.5.8.3.1

>> to integer! ""
** Script Error: Invalid argument:
** Near: to integer! ""
You would have thought RT's automated tests would have trapped such 
a change.
Oldes
18-Oct-2005
[1293x3]
oh, I just submited bug with the forall and just now found that the 
same bug was already submited
http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=-456&
if I would like to just skip from the loop, I would use break, not 
return, but understand that carl made the cahnge for the propper 
report on errors.
Ladislav
22-Oct-2005
[1296]
Gabriele: I submitted a "Read beyond network port" crash ticket. 
(see Recycle bug group discussion)
Mchean
23-Oct-2005
[1297]
dont have access to rambo could someone submit an error in the word 
brower for me.  in the find box a down arrow errors with: ** Script 
Error: index? expected series argument
 of type: series port
** Where: pick-next
** Near: sync-funcs-list index? f
show-word first
DideC
23-Oct-2005
[1298]
This is a known and already corrected bug. The new version has not 
been uploaded yet, waiting for other changes pending.
BrianH
26-Oct-2005
[1299x3]
RAMBO 3939: In response to your question, I propose an alternative. 
Instead of changing to-dec and to-int to handle decimal and integer 
(respectively) source values correctly (slowing down the common case), 
add as-dec and as-int opcodes that act as assignments when given 
source values already of the corresponding type, letting those opcodes 
have the overhead when you can't be sure the source is of the opposite 
type. Also, change to-int to assign 0 instead of 1 for invalid source 
values, to be consistent with to-dec assigning 0.0 then.
I don't have an account on RAMBO, so there is no other way for me 
to reply to the question asked of my submission.
For that matter, I just submitted another rebcode proposal to RAMBO, 
and then noticed some code in the fix section that I wanted to change. 
The submitted code still works, but I would still like to clean it 
up a little. If I had an account on RAMBO, would I be able to fix 
my own submissions?
Pekr
27-Oct-2005
[1302]
Rambo needs "add comment" section ... I am not sure Carl checks regularry 
here ....
Rebolek
27-Oct-2005
[1303]
Send it to RAMBO :)
Pekr
27-Oct-2005
[1304]
ah, I should read first ... dunno if Rambo allows you to edit your 
submissions ...
Gabriele
27-Oct-2005
[1305]
You need edit permissions, and that applies to ALL tickets, not just 
yours, AFAIK. So I guess the answer is no.
BrianH
27-Oct-2005
[1306x4]
Gabriele, that's what I thought :(
RAMBO 3939 still has a status of "Waiting".
On RAMBO 3942 in the fix code, in the either statement please change 
the test to empty? labels and swap the code blocks, thanks. It'll 
work the same but will be cleaner. Like this:
        either empty? labels [rule: opcode-rule] [
            label-rule: make block! length? labels

            foreach [key val] labels [insert insert tail label-rule to-lit-word 
            key '|]
            clear back tail label-rule

            label-fixup-rule: [there: label-rule (there/1: 2 + select labels 
            there/1)]

            label-error-rule: [label-rule (error/with here "Cannot use label 
            here:")]
            rule: fixup-rule
        ]
Submitted my proposed alternate to 3939 as a new RAMBO entry. Maybe 
that will work.
Gabriele
27-Oct-2005
[1310x2]
actually, it's possible that 3939 will be implemented. to-dec and 
to-int are unlikely to be used in loops, so their speed is not necessarily 
an issue.
this hasn't been decided yet anyway.
DideC
27-Oct-2005
[1312]
What about an AS-INC AS-DEC instead, as proposed above (BrianH) ?
Gabriele
27-Oct-2005
[1313]
looks like Carl's changing to-int and to-dec instead.
BrianH
27-Oct-2005
[1314x3]
Yay! "Generic" math here we come!
Thanks for the change to 3942 as well. A braino, I forgot about empty? 
for a moment :(
Should I make RAMBO entries for the other rebcode enhancements we 
came up with in the Rebol Enhancements group?
Gabriele
27-Oct-2005
[1317x2]
should not be needed.
if you want to summarize the suggestions anyway, i can pass the summary 
on.
BrianH
27-Oct-2005
[1319]
There were a couple categories - give me a moment.
Gabriele
27-Oct-2005
[1320]
i think i passed all of them along, but just to be sure...