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

Dockimbel
13-Oct-2008
[3131x3]
enface => word!
rebview and enface are both 2.7.6.3.1
Should I RAMBO that ? Is RAMBO still used ?
Henrik
13-Oct-2008
[3134]
RAMBO is still used for R2 bugs, yes.
BrianH
13-Oct-2008
[3135]
It sounds like the preprocessing is loading and molding the code 
before encapping, without using mold/all.
Gabriele
14-Oct-2008
[3136x2]
I think this might be in RAMBO already. At least I remember mentioning 
this problem to Carl a few years back. As Brian says, it's a missing 
/ALL refinement.
About the spam, I clean that up every single day. What you see is 
one day worth of spam.
Graham
14-Oct-2008
[3138x2]
is it all human spam?  or bot spam?
can you add a rebol captcha to it  to save you work?
Gabriele
14-Oct-2008
[3140x2]
given that there is not much protection in rambo, it's probably bot 
spam.
the main thing is, that changing rambo (i don't know the code) would 
take me more time (especially testing and making sure we're not going 
to lose data) than the 20 seconds or so it takes to delete the spam. 
So I never get to study the code and see what can be done...
[unknown: 5]
11-Jan-2009
[3142]
I verified this same bug today http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=3357&
 The workaround is to use /binary and then the limit is gone.
Dockimbel
14-Aug-2009
[3143]
I've searched RAMBO about a WAIT inconsistency : the dictionnary 
says that "If the value is a DATE/TIME, wait until that DATE/TIME", 
but date! are not accepted as argument (both directly or in a block). 
If this a known bug? I can't find it in RAMBO.
Graham
14-Aug-2009
[3144x3]
doesn't it mean a time value?
It's probably a documentation issue.
Being able to wait for specified date/time would be great for doing 
cron
Dockimbel
14-Aug-2009
[3147]
Precisely, I'm working on a scheduler lib for UniServe and I was 
wondering if I could wait for date!, but it looks like not.
Pekr
14-Aug-2009
[3148]
would be good feature to have at least in R3 ...
Henrik
14-Aug-2009
[3149]
good idea. create a curecode wish for it, please.
Gregg
21-Aug-2009
[3150]
You can't wait on date! AFAIK.
Oldes
22-Aug-2009
[3151]
wait-date: func [date [date!]][wait difference date now]
Maxim
22-Aug-2009
[3152]
always someone to prove another wrong...  ;-)
Gregg
23-Aug-2009
[3153]
An excellent solution, but you still can't wait on a date!. :-)
Oldes
23-Aug-2009
[3154]
I agree, that it should be supported directly, so is there the ticket 
already?
Graham
23-Aug-2009
[3155x2]
what happens if someone changes the clock while you're waiting on 
a date! ?
what should?
PeterWood
23-Aug-2009
[3157x2]
What happens if someone changes the machine's clock while you wating 
for a length of time ?
you -> you're
Gabriele
24-Aug-2009
[3159]
graham, the only solution to that would be to wait, say, 10 seconds 
at a time, and check. but it really depends on the application...
btiffin
24-Aug-2009
[3160]
re; wait till time, isn't that       add multiply subtract then/date 
now/date 86400 subtract then/time now/time


then - now * seconds per day + delta hours?   Negative time! possible, 
which it seems wait takes as zero anyway.
Gabriele
25-Aug-2009
[3161x2]
btiffin, just use difference now then
(or difference now/precise then if necessary)
btiffin
25-Aug-2009
[3163]
Thanks Gabriele;  I knew there was a more concise method of getting 
at time!  from date arithmetic, but I got sidetracked when the google 
search wanted to show me COBOL data arithmetic.   ;)  Can't ever 
know enough COBOL, err, aaah, REBOL.
Nicolas
1-Mar-2010
[3164x2]
This hangs.
in R3
BrianH
1-Mar-2010
[3166]
This?
Nicolas
1-Mar-2010
[3167]
p: make op! [[n m] [n * m]]   3 p 4
BrianH
1-Mar-2010
[3168x2]
Wrong group, but good to know. MAKE op! clearly needs to do more 
parameter checking. CureCode it.
There's no reason to expect that to work, btw. An error should be 
thrown by MAKE.
Nicolas
1-Mar-2010
[3170]
why?
BrianH
1-Mar-2010
[3171]
Because ops aren't mezzanines - they redirect to other functions.
Nicolas
1-Mar-2010
[3172x2]
if not divisible-by-any? n primes
if n is-not-divisible-by-any primes
if they could be made we could use this kind of grammar
BrianH
1-Mar-2010
[3174x2]
There is no known spec argument for MAKE op! that is supposed work. 
You're spposed to use the OP function.
User-defined ops are a planned feature, not a currently working feature.
Nicolas
1-Mar-2010
[3176x2]
Thanks
How many people are in here?
BrianH
1-Mar-2010
[3178]
It's not a bad idea though. Still, CureCode that code you posted 
above. It's a serious bug that MAKE doesn't trigger an error there.
Gabriele
30-Oct-2010
[3179]
Anybody knows what's this about?

http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=-4786&
Ladislav
30-Oct-2010
[3180]
Well, I do not think so...