World: r3wp

Note: TO LOGIC! is compatible with IF in cases like:

if "false" [...]
if to logic! "false" [...]

except for one case: to logic! 0 yields FALSE

another example: to logic! 'false

oh this last one is a bit dangerous IMHO.


since not using the /all refinement of mold easily create true/false 
words... (I  know you'll say use /all) but REBOL isn't always the 
data originator.

Anytime you pass a string buffer to the API, you have to pre-fill 
it. I have a little func called NULL-BUFF, that just inits a string 
filled with nulls. 

A DWORD is 32 bits. A WORD is 16.

but true and false literal string representations of boolean values... 
should be a valid representation of input just just like literal 
integer, decimal, dates, urls, files, issues, words, etc values . 
 no?


Only in the case of TO LOGIC!, not as general substitutes anywhere. 
Of course, it's easy enough to patch TO-LOGIC to do that if you want.

I think I actually did that at one point, and also did a func to 
allow FORMing logic values to their alternate words (on/off, yes/no).

I agree that its only a valid case for the TO LOGIC!

I really think we must separate general evaluation and value creation/conversion 
in our heads.

Agreed. I'll have to look at my CAST func to see if I dealt with 
any of these issues there.

Nope. Maybe I should. :-\

I had also done as-decimal, as-integer which had an expanded input 
format... maybe we should publish a set of functions, one for each 
datatype and submit to the community for peer review?  maybe then, 
this can find itself within R3.  if the work is all done, I don't 
see why Carl wouldn't want a consistent, and already documented set 
of functions.

and if he wants, he can just re-implement them natively, if the speed 
gains are worth it.

We can publish them, sure, but I don't know if they'll get into R3.

Carl is very open AFAICT.  this is specifically walking on one issue 
which needs improvement in REBOL in general.

part of why R3 is going to be so incompatible... I'd say its the 
perfect time to address this and actually propose stuff instead of 
just whine that they don't work  ;-)

the speed is secondary at this stage... what we really need is to 
layout the logic and demonstrate a consistent path to conversion 
for all datatypes.  two or three guiding principles will emerge out 
of the implementation... no need to try and define them too early 
on IMO.

Agreed, but we don't have a community effort ogranized to propose 
and submit ideas, in general, for R3. Something *else* I keep meaning 
to do. :-)

revault  ;-)

Yup. :-)

I have been toying with the idea to add system environment variable 
support in slim for the path resolution  :-)

I have the getenv all done... I think I prefer this method by far.

although the current "no install" solution will always stay... and 
works very well for testing and simple distribution of scripts.

As an addition, correct, not the only way to specify SL:IM paths?

I like "no install" solutions. :-)

nope, the 5th option  :-)

btw, this is my buffer init procedure for routines:

buffer: head insert/dup copy "" #"^@" 100

for a 100 byte buffer (99 max length C string)

Max, I think you'll find great difficulty in setting the environment

humm no I just want to read it.  so that install can be setup by 
IT dept.  instead of obsure and inconsistent user.r file

What's the best way to avoid / handle "Math or number overflow" errors? 
How can I ensure that if the user inputs extrem big numbers, won't 
crash my app?


Especially if I'm doing complex calculations. Do I have to wrap every 
calculation to catch this error? That would make the coding very 
cumbersome.

I guess, you'll need a validation routine to be called after each 
entering of a number by the user, and chech with something like
if error? try [...]

*check*

But as said, if you have formulars it depends on all input values 
if such an error can happen or not.

After validating the input, you should also put all calculations 
inside one big if error? try [...] and tell the user about overflow. 
It's not that strange! If you get an overflow, you get an error from 
REBOL, and you have ways to handle that, so it doesn't crash.

Ok, but I have about 400 calculations in my app...

So need to go through the complete code and wrap them all.

And those calcs are not one after the other. Scattered throughout 
the program.

I have the same problem with networking operations. programs will 
halt to console if there is a networking error. the only real solution 
is to wrap your calculation code in a function. you could call it 
'calc, and have that return a disarmed error on failure or a number 
or whatever fits to the situation.


This way calc [2 / 0] wouldn't crash to console and it's fairly clean 
to insert.

should read: The only real solution is to wrap your calculation code 
in a block and use that as a function argument. The function could 
be called 'calc.

Rober, liquid is released... do try it out.

(Robert, sorry)

since things are cached, only a value which changes cause any amount 
of processing...

Max, I will but this will need some test and a major rewrite of my 
app. So not for the 1.0 release.

anytime you need help, I'll be happy to give direction...

more demos and tutorials comming shortly

robert, depending on your code, there may be an easier way than put 
try in every calculation; for example if you have a window and do 
the calculation when the user presses a button, you could just use 
try in  the button's action; or, you could wrap the do-events (i.e. 
view) in try, and so on. it also depends on how easy it is to recover 
from a given point (the farther you are from the location of the 
error, the harder it is to recover, usually).

What's the best available XML toolkit available for Rebol these days?

RebXML!? ;-) http://home.tiscali.dk/john.niclasen/rebxml/

Can't be much simpler than that, if simplicity is what you're after.

Looking now :)

Is there a  way to build a rebol object with these tools?