World: r3wp

how do you test for a function that returns nothing? I want to DO 
a script, and check if there was an error, but the script might sometimes 
not return anything

!>>error? [()]
== false

!>>unset? ()    
== true

!>>attempt[() true]
== true
!>>attempt[1 / 0 true] 
== none

if error? set/any 'err try [do %script.r][print mold disarm err]

MichaelB: about the path problem in request-dir, it's a bug in the 
code.


The simple solution is to patch this line (in request-dir func at 
the end of the script :
	if not all [keep path] [path: any [where what-dir]]
like this :
	if not all [keep path] [path: copy any [where what-dir]]

the 'path word is local to ctx-req-dir context and the Rebol path 
must not be changed by it. It's up to the "user code" to change it 
if he wants to.

But I agree that Rebol should check if path is "complete" (trailing 
"/") before using it in read/save/load/... functions

I have got question from Bobik, to which I don't know answer ... 
I tracked the problem, but dunno why it is as it is :-)

blk: [1 false]

if blk/2 [print 123]

he was wondering, why it is true .... I found out after checking 
the type? blk/2, which is - word! .... my question is why it is word! 
and not logic! ?

blk/1 is integer!, why false here is not logic! ? anyone? thanks 
:-)

blk: reduce [1 false]   ;; to correctly evaluate the block contents

I guess it's analogous to:
  blk: [1 make object! [a: 1]]
  print blk/2
      make

blk: [1 #[false]]

ok, thanks ... I think now I understand ... yesterday I read about 
Haskell and functional languages ...

Bobik used str: "[1 false]" val: load str ... so basically, he "executed" 
(evaluated) string, he got block, but he forgot to do the same for 
block content - so here reduce comes in the play ...

It can be annoying because reduce does not have a /deep refinement 
-- so if you load nested blocks, you may need to do a lot of reduces 
to make it work:
   xx: reduce  load " [ false [ true]]"
   == [false [true]]
   type? xx/1
   == logic!
    type? xx/2/1
   == word!

I wonder if not being strongly typed (as Haskell claims they are), 
does not lead to almost untrackable bugs ... yesterday, working with 
debugger with our Ubicom CPU, I started to wodner, how we can live 
without the debugger in REBOL :-(

I''ve been caught-22 on that many times since I like to set my ini 
file definitions to be readable blocks and don't follow why other 
data types are correctly recognized e.g. blk: [1 12-feb-2006 $30.00] 
 but not true or false or Yes or No  without a reduce.  If you use 
blocks for the ini file settings you get caught by the reduce  e.g. 
if want this ini: [	clean-up-target-directory? Yes start-at 10:30:01 
first-day-to-run 12-dec-2006 last-day-to-run 31-dec-2006] reduce 
requires me to flag the words as 'words.

I tend to use nested objects as records stored in files. They suffer 
the same problem.

My solution is a single read function hat runs through reducing things.

Petr: having only 'trace or inserted 'print for debugging is like 
going back to the dark ages.
Better debugging would be a great step forward.

debugger? does a tool like this exist for REBOL? http://www.hmkdesign.dk/rebol/reblog/reblog.html

it's practically automated testing and probe on serious steroids 
:-)

Looks great!
Any release date?

I could release it now, but it's very, very buggy and it's not shielded 
from the program context

You need to decide if you have the time now to deal with the bugs 
people will issue.  If not, wait til it is more stable.

http://www.hmkdesign.dk/rebol/tester/tester.r

consider it a flimsy prototype. requires list-view.r to be in the 
same path as the script

please don't submit suggestions or bug reports at this point

heh, cool :-)

Henrik - wrong link to list-view on the above reblog.html .... /reblog/ 
in the path should not be there ...

true and false - just use mold/all or save/all.

well, imo Bobik has this block as some result of form field get-values 
function :-)

is the user typing true and false in?

dunno, would have to ask him, once I catch him on icq ... but - I 
think it is OK, I explained to him why he needs to reduce the block 
...

Henrik: just for info, there is CSS styles junks at the top of some 
pages like this one (in IE6 almost) http://www.hmkdesign.dk/rebol/reblog/files/category-3.html

#[true] etc.

didec: odd. maybe not the entire page was uploaded. my internet connection 
is very bad right now

pekr, link fixed

Thanks Gabriele --- save/all neatly does the job.

No use to me though in several cases -- I support  applications that 
pre-date that refinement and run under older versions of core.
But it'll save me a chore in future apps.

hmm... seems I forgot there are some LIST-VIEW 0.0.29 only functions 
used in Tester. maybe I should do a release soon....

Another new feature that may help is the /ONLY refinement on REDUCE.

Very cool idea Henrik. Keep us posted.

Does any one have a tool for examining large objects?   I'm trying 
to find where things are defined in beer, and using an editor to 
browse the port object is not fun.  A sort of anamonitor for objects?

port! values don't support the use of FIRST to get their words (AFAIK). 
At least I think that's what I ran into trying to support them in 
my old object browser.

where's your object browser Gregg?

graham, did you try the object browser in Viewtop/Tools ?

Nope .. ;)

first is a port-operation.. Maybe it could use the default-words 
for ports.