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

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

Gregg
8-Apr-2007
[7429]
Thanks for the post on this. I haven't hit it, but I might someday.
ChristianE
8-Apr-2007
[7430x2]
If [APPEND/ONLY [] []] is what you were looking for to recieve with 
the help of BUILD, Henrik, BUILD/WITH [APPEND/ONLY [] []] [] works, 
too, and to me it seems to be a bit more intuitive.
But since BUILD [A/B [] []] gives [A/B [] []] as one would expect, 
I'd say this is a real bug in BUILD. You probably should let Ladislav 
know.
Gabriele
9-Apr-2007
[7432]
a path! is a kind of block!. so i guess BUILD is just recursing into 
paths. it's a bug but... it seems a cool feature to me instead. you 
can build paths ;)
Henrik
9-Apr-2007
[7433]
probably should be included in docs :-)
ChristianE
9-Apr-2007
[7434x2]
No, I'd say it's a bug, due to inconsistent behaviour:

>> build [append/only [] []]
== [append/unset [] []]

vs.

>> build [append/anything-other-than-only [] []]
== [append/anything-other-than-only [] []]
It's just the /only refinement producing the unexpected result.
Robert
9-Apr-2007
[7436x2]
How are the functions named to access the Windows Registry?
I need to read out a possible proxy config.
Oldes
9-Apr-2007
[7438]
http://www.rebol.com/docs/sdk/registry.html
Gregg
9-Apr-2007
[7439]
The reg funcs get unset in *some* versions of REBOL,so make sure 
they're available in the one you use.
Robert
9-Apr-2007
[7440x3]
Hm... in my version these functions are unset. I use REBFACE to start 
a script.
And it shows that the "Windows Registry Access" stuff is loaded. 
I use 2.7.5
Any idea what to do?
Gregg
9-Apr-2007
[7443x2]
1) Go back to an older version.
2) Look at calling the registry APIs directly
3) Tell Carl we need them back. :-)
The Roxy setup toolkit uses them, so I'm still encapping installers 
with some really old version of REBOL.
Pekr
9-Apr-2007
[7445]
hmm, I can't find them even in 1.2.8, nor 1.2.1
Robert
9-Apr-2007
[7446]
Hmm... ok. I drop him a note and see what happens. Otherwise I have 
to use registry.r from rebol.org
Pekr
9-Apr-2007
[7447]
dunno why those were removed? I do understand it for plug-in, but 
normal View?
Gregg
9-Apr-2007
[7448x3]
I think security was the issue, but they should still be available 
in the SDK in any case.
I think I use 1.2.48 to use them.
Yup, that's the one.
Pekr
9-Apr-2007
[7451]
there are some funcs in the sdk, but for install kind of purpose, 
association etc., but those all are just wrappers around natives, 
which are unset. So - how can we have their sources, if reg* functions 
are natives? :-)
Gabriele
9-Apr-2007
[7452]
Christian, that's because "only" is a keyword for build. [append/only 
[] []] is for build the same as [[append only] [] []]. I agree it's 
a bug, however I'd be tempted to leave it as-is ;)
ChristianE
9-Apr-2007
[7453]
Ah, ok, you wouldn't know from HELP BUILD but it's in the script's 
comment. So it's kind of an "intended bug", I see that now ;-)
Ladislav
9-Apr-2007
[7454x6]
it is not bug, totally intended. If you are afraid of INS and ONLY 
keywords, you have to use the /WITH refinement
maybe I should use a less usual word instead of 'only ? 'ins seems 
to be less conflicting, since nobody uses it for "normal" purposes
anyway, when you use the /with refinement, you are totally safe, 
since it is you who specifies the keywords
regarding the path processing - I did that intentionally - the processed 
"parts" are: block! | paren! | path! | set-path! | lit-path! as you 
can see from the source
is there a request to leave something out?
(or change a default keyword?)
ChristianE
9-Apr-2007
[7460]
I'm not afraid of ONLY, nor was it me spending/loosing time understanding 
what's going on there. I'm just suggesting to put some info regarding 
INS and SOME into the help string if it's intended behaviour; so 
no offense intended.
Ladislav
9-Apr-2007
[7461]
yes, that is a good suggestion, putting it in
Henrik
9-Apr-2007
[7462]
>> series? []
== true
>> trim [] 
** Script Error: Cannot use trim on block! value
** Near: trim []
>> ? trim
USAGE:
    TRIM series /head /tail /auto /lines /all /with str 
...

Is this not kind of inconsistent?
Ladislav
9-Apr-2007
[7463x3]
check http://www.fm.tul.cz/~ladislav/rebol/build.rplease to see 
whether the doc strings are better now
>> help trim
USAGE:
    TRIM series /head /tail /auto /lines /all /with str

DESCRIPTION:

     Removes whitespace from a string. Default removes from head and tail.
     TRIM is an action value.
so the only "inconsistency" is the argument name, as I see it
Henrik
9-Apr-2007
[7466x2]
don't you get a list of arguments with accepted datatypes?
ARGUMENTS:
     series -- (Type: series port)
Ladislav
9-Apr-2007
[7468]
ah, sorry, it does not check whether the argument is an ANY-STRING! 
or a PORT! , but instead it allows SERIES!
Gregg
10-Apr-2007
[7469]
I've brought this up before as well, but it looks like it will be 
there for R3, according to the recent blog on it.
Henrik
12-Apr-2007
[7470]
I noticed this:
>> to-url [http b c]
== http://b/c
>> to-url [http b 125]
** Script Error: Invalid argument: 125
** Where: to-url
** Near: to url! :value


Couldn't it be useful to have 125 accepted as a port number since 
it's the first integer in the block?
Maxim
12-Apr-2007
[7471]
why isn't 125 valid anyways?  

 http://b/125

 is a valid url AFAIK  no?
Henrik
12-Apr-2007
[7472]
yes it is. I half-expect Gabriele or Ladislav to come back with an 
answer like "no, because if we allowed that, the Internet would explode" 
or something :-)
Sunanda
12-Apr-2007
[7473]
Yes it is - completely valid as a URL.
Henrik
12-Apr-2007
[7474]
I came up with my own:

>> to-url [http a 125]
== http://a:125

or

== http://a/125


so probably not a good idea to autmatically assume it's a port number.
Izkata
12-Apr-2007
[7475]
(hopefully) quick question - I know you can use prin "^(page)" (or 
prin "^L") to clear the current terminal window - is there something 
just as simple to clear just the current line?  Or move the cursor 
back to the beginning of the line?
Sunanda
12-Apr-2007
[7476]
prin cr
btiffin
12-Apr-2007
[7477]
Sunanda;  You should have mentioned loading the Terminal User Interface 
and all the funky VT100 escape sequences and the...
Just kidding :)
Sunanda
12-Apr-2007
[7478]
I' not that evil .... not yet, anyway :-)