World: r3wp
[RAMBO] The REBOL bug and enhancement database
older newer | first last |
Henrik 13-Oct-2006 [1852] | same here, but I don't see the problem as often as with continuous reuse of scripts in the same console. they might be graphics related, but not necessarily View related. |
BrianH 13-Oct-2006 [1853] | Well you're graphics guys, while I mostly do file and data manipulation. |
Robert 15-Oct-2006 [1854] | Henrik, yes, I know this problem. Looks to me that some things aren't reseted. You can see this, if you have a face A in the first run and than a face B (and not A anymore) in the second run. A is still available. |
Anton 15-Oct-2006 [1855] | Henrik, ah yes, in my mind, sorry :) |
Henrik 17-Oct-2006 [1856] | the clipboard bug mentioned in AltME is not rambo'ed? it would be easy to fix, wouldn't it? |
Rebolek 17-Oct-2006 [1857] | what's the difference between Build and Done in RAMBO? Lot of bugs says Build with comment like "Fixed in 1.3.1 (1.3.2)". Shouldn't those bugs be marked as Done? |
Gabriele 17-Oct-2006 [1858] | rebolek, the process should be built -> tested -> done. if noone is testing, they never get to tested. :) (we eventually assume that no news means good news and mark them.) |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1859x3] | Ladislav, why is $4141 "If versus CASE" of high importance ? |
Also, #4145 "Struct comparison bug" is the same as #3651 "struct! are incomparable". | |
#3225 "Default mezzanine", what would an example usage of try/recover look like ? I think I still prefer 'default, being more concise. | |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1862x2] | High importance - Carl wanted it to be - to correct it soon |
#3651 - I overlooked it somehow, sorry | |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1864] | Hmm, ok. |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1865] | try/recover - that is how Carl wanted it to be. (he didn't want to define a new function) |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1866] | Pity about that. |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1867x4] | my note is, that it should be native |
(because only a native can discern a "live" error and a "computed" one) | |
pity about that - I understand it, that you are already using Default and this will make your code incompatible? | |
you can still define the mezzanine in your %user.r if you want to | |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1871] | No, I was looking forward to using it. I've been avoiding the overhead of maintaining another patch script by using if error? set/any 'err try [...] over and over... |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1872] | usage: try/recover [...] 'error [print disarm error] |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1873] | The pity is more from the "richness of human expression" point of view. I can understand the more conservative "don't fill up the default namespace with too many functions" point of view too.. |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1874] | (i.e. the usage will be the same as the usage of the Default function) |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1875x2] | Ok, that's not bad. It does cut down 9 characters. |
Oh I think I remember the discussion now. | |
Ladislav 17-Oct-2006 [1877x2] | The advantage of "reusing" TRY is, that the code will be easier to maintain this way (TRY and DEFAULT would have a lot of common code otherwise) |
(I am speaking about interpreter code above) | |
Anton 17-Oct-2006 [1879x3] | Yes, that is good reasoning. |
I am satisfied once again. | |
#4124 "set-modes doesn't work on file directories" - maybe add a note to Paul here that "the filesystem may not support setting all of the modes that are gettable by get-modes. For instance you can't set modification-date, but you can set the owner-write flag." Maybe there should be a more informative access error type, not just "Cannot open ...". | |
Graham 17-Oct-2006 [1882] | but it should work in windows |
Maxim 17-Oct-2006 [1883] | will you be online for a few minutes? |
BrianH 17-Oct-2006 [1884x2] | Anton, error #4124 is not a filesystem problem. I replicated it here, on NTFS, in a directory that I have permission to do anything. NTFS supports changing the modification date of directories - I have an Explorer shell extension that does just that, as well as a command line touch utility. REBOL can change that attribute on files, but not directories. REBOL is probably hust using the wrong API. |
hust -> just (typo) | |
Pekr 17-Oct-2006 [1886] | different API - maybe the same goes with TimeZone info .... Ladislav found new pointer .... currently under investigation ... |
Anton 18-Oct-2006 [1887] | Ok Brian, thanks for the clarification. Maybe that info should be added to the ticket "NTFS supports changing the modification date of directories..." |
Henrik 22-Oct-2006 [1888] | I accidentally put a string in the font size, like this: view layout [area font [size: "m"]] Windows gives me a small font, which seems right. On OSX I either get screen trashing inside the text area, hanging or a segmentation fault. |
Robert 23-Oct-2006 [1889] | Is there any simple way to add a screenshot upload function to the RAMBO script? Or has anyone done it already? |
Anton 23-Oct-2006 [1890] | No, and the RAMBO source is not open, as far as I know. |
Henrik 24-Oct-2006 [1891] | can anyone make the layout code I wrote above crash in Linux? I don't have Linux handy... |
Volker 24-Oct-2006 [1892x2] | survives here. |
font is smaller | |
Rebolek 24-Oct-2006 [1894x2] | Actually, I see quite the opposite. Using following code: view layout [text "MIQXA" text "MIQXA" font [size: "m"]] the second line is bigger .I'm trying this on xubuntu 6.06 (using area has same results, but area is much bigger than text so it's harder to notice). I'm rebooting to Win to see the difference. |
so I tried on Win and the second line is so small so it's unreadable (font size 1 or something like that) | |
Henrik 24-Oct-2006 [1896x3] | yes, I know. It segfaults on OSX so I wondered if it happened under Linux as well. |
oh, you wrote about it. I didn't notice volkers input. sorry. | |
I will rambo it if there are no objections. | |
Anton 24-Oct-2006 [1899] | No objections on anything that causes a segfault (unless, of course, it's already in rambo somewhere.) |
Anton 26-Oct-2006 [1900x2] | ; Crash write %test.r {rebol [] do %test2.r probe system/script/args} write %test2.r {rebol [] system/script/parent: none} ; <-- naughty parenticide do %test.r ; <-- DO file makes an error but doesn't really survive do %test.r ; <-- so this second attempt shuts down console |
DO probably needs to hang on to the original system/script object, and restore it after the child script has returned. The child script could probably also modify attributes of the parent object and leave the parent script confused. | |
older newer | first last |