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

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

Graham
20-Jul-2009
[14285]
Pekr, skip can always be used as the first word in the parse rule 
if you don't like next
Graham
21-Jul-2009
[14286x2]
What's the best way of stopping an application from starting if another 
instance is already running?  The app is a core based app that is 
in a forever loop.
I guess I could always make it a View app instead, and wait on  a 
port ... and use a timer to trigger the other stuff I need to do.
Pekr
21-Jul-2009
[14288x2]
I once used lock file - you keep file openeed, and you try to delete 
that lock from the other app. If you can delete it, so create lock 
file, if not, another instance is already running. But - that works 
only under Windows, I've heard that under Linux, you can delete file, 
even if another app is using it. Dunno if true ...
You can also use TCP ports, but if you open some port, firewall will 
step-in and ask for approval ...
Graham
21-Jul-2009
[14290x2]
so, open a file and keep it open?
could try that .. seems easy enough
Pekr
21-Jul-2009
[14292x2]
yes ...
under Windows, if you open file in one process, another one can't 
delete it. Easy enough. Prevents the case, where process does not 
remove the lock, but crashes. Then you would be in locked situation. 
But if app crashes, you can remove the log. Under linux, dunno how 
to do it. One chance is e.g. the need for process to update timestamp, 
and if timestamp is not updated, then app most probably crashed, 
so you can start another instance ...
sqlab
21-Jul-2009
[14294]
open a listen port, there can only one be open
Pekr
21-Jul-2009
[14295]
sqlab ... yes, but requires firewall approval ...
Janko
21-Jul-2009
[14296]
maybe you can use rename in the same way I used it to implement simple 
locking just before in DB Chat channel
Sunanda
21-Jul-2009
[14297]
One way:

On startup:
-- check for your timestamp file

-- If it does not exist or  (it exists and timestamp is over 2 minutes 
in past), proceed to run

-- otherwise, wait 65 seconds.  Test if timestamp has changed: yes-halt; 
no-proceed

While running:

-- write the  timestamp file at least once a minute with an updated 
time

On clean closedown:
-- delete the timestamp file.

Drawbacks:

-- application could take over a minute to restart if immediately 
restarted after a crash.

-- manual deletion of timestamp file can lead to multiple instances 
running (you can minimise this by re-reading file and aborting if 
timestamp is not the last one you set)
-- all those writes of the file.
sqlab
22-Jul-2009
[14298]
Sunanda,  does your timestamp file mean a file with the timestamp 
as content or just the date and time of the file?

I have many times seen, that the timestamp of a file under windows 
does not change, although there is always data added to the file.
Graham
22-Jul-2009
[14299]
You can use set-modes to update the timestamp
Sunanda
22-Jul-2009
[14300]
sqlab -- I mean a file whose contents is just a timestamp, eg:
  write %timestamp.txt mod now/precise

In practice, the actual method is a little more convoluted (to avoid, 
for example, two instances both starting at once -- so neither sees 
a pre-existing timestamp.txt file).
Robert
22-Jul-2009
[14301]
I need to issue the combination ALT+RETURN into a string. How can 
I do this? Is there a control character for ALT like for CTRL?
ChristianE
22-Jul-2009
[14302]
AFAIK, due to multi-platform issues and various platforms not supporting 
it the ALT-key has never been utilized for the view event engine, 
hence it's probably not possible to detect the ALT-key. There's no 
/ALT refinement for the EVENT! datatype like there is /SHIFT and 
/CONTROL, so most likely there's also no control sequence for the 
ALT-key for /CORE to work with, too.
Robert
22-Jul-2009
[14303]
I tried various HEX codes I found in google but none worked. Excel 
just printed strange chars instead of doing a line-break.
Henrik
22-Jul-2009
[14304]
is alt+return really a char?
Pekr
22-Jul-2009
[14305]
IIRC, Alt is supported under View. What might not be supported is 
combination of some keys, e.g. ctrl + tab, so you can't tab between 
the tabs in an OS compatible manner. It would require some tricks 
to register for such events. Dunno if Alt + Enter should work or 
not ...
Anton
22-Jul-2009
[14306]
In R2 View, Alt is not supported. If you look at the event datatype, 
there are fields only for control and shift.
Pekr
22-Jul-2009
[14307]
ah, my bad, Anton is right ....
ChristianE
22-Jul-2009
[14308]
Robert, you're mentioning Excel, so you're probably trying to do 
ALT+RETURN hard line-breaks with Excel thru comlib?

Maybe you can use the actual character code that Excel uses whenever 
one presses Alt+Enter. The web says Excel just inserts a line feed 
#"^/", have you tried that?
Gabriele
23-Jul-2009
[14309]
Alt+RETURN is not a character
Robert
23-Jul-2009
[14310]
Christian, right, I try to insert a hard line-break in Excel. I tried 
inserting NEWLINE, which doesn't work. Will try just the LN. Thanks.
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14311]
Apart from chucking an error, what is the best way to determine if 
a path exists inside an object?  So, the path might be 10 deep ...
Sunanda
27-Jul-2009
[14312]
As far as I know, Graham, there is not a simpler way than provoking 
an error.
If you are already at the bottom of the structure FIND can help:

    a: make object! [b: make object! [c: 1]]
    find next first a/b 'd     ;; is a/b/d valid?
    == none
    find next first a/b 'c     ;; is a.b.c valid?
   == [c]


But recursing to the bottom may be slower than just trying the error?:
   error? try [a/b/d]
   error? try [a/b/c]
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14313]
Seems ugly to have to use an error ...
Anton
27-Jul-2009
[14314]
It's a poorly specified way of obtaining some information.
Henrik
27-Jul-2009
[14315]
perhaps there is merit for a feature to quickly determine the existence 
of a deeply stored value?
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14316x3]
can't even do this

in object 'path/to/rebol
because 'in expects a word
How is this done in R3 ??
BrianH
27-Jul-2009
[14319x2]
Same as in R2:
in object/path/to 'rebol
The problem is that at some point the field names can turn into function 
refinements, depending on the values assigned...
Anton
27-Jul-2009
[14321x4]
And why is that such a problem?
I mean, it's a solvable problem. IN could theoretically be enhanced 
to also accept paths, but, iIrc, Carl wasn't keen on the idea because 
he wanted IN to remain simple and fast. He said something like "it's 
for words".
The only thing we can do is make our own mezz version of IN that 
accepts paths.
(Ok, it's not a solvable problem for paths with dynamic elements 
in them like functions, but of course, there are many more "static" 
paths which this would be darned useful for.)
BrianH
27-Jul-2009
[14325]
GET and SET work with paths in R3. Perhaps as you describe could 
be added as well, to handle the IN function for paths. And functions 
wouldn't be traced through.
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14326]
the problem with object/path/to 'rebol is that it assumes object/path/to 
exists
BrianH
27-Jul-2009
[14327x3]
Yup.
So you have to check for 'to in object/path first, and so on. I didn't 
say it would be a fast mezzanine :(
The way this kind of thing is resolved in R3 is through liberal use 
of the ASSERT/type function, and not representing XML as objects.
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14330x2]
I guess there's a lot of advantages to just using blocks ... as it 
is now, some elements in my object are blocks and some are objects 
which makes it very messy
OTOH, blocks could get messy too ...


at present I have structures like ccr/body/alerts/alert where alert 
can be either a single alert object, or a block of alert objects

Ideally if I were to use blocks, it would end up that alert is always 
a block .. 0 ... n blocks
BrianH
27-Jul-2009
[14332]
The R3 GUI is structured as a mix of objects, maps, blocks and gobs, 
but it is very consistent and not messy.
Graham
27-Jul-2009
[14333]
I presume it can't change though ... if a particular item is an object!, 
it won't be a block of objects in another instance ....
BrianH
27-Jul-2009
[14334]
very consistent
, yes :)