World: r3wp
[Script Library] REBOL.org: Script library and Mailing list archive
older newer | first last |
Anton 18-Mar-2009 [807] | Ok, so things seem to be proceeding well. The rebol.org Library's support for utf-8 was actually stronger than thought, and what're being added are functions to help deal with legacy client apps which misidentify the file encoding. |
PeterWood 18-Mar-2009 [808] | It's not just legacy client apps unless you consider all Rebol/View scripts as legacy apps. |
Anton 18-Mar-2009 [809x2] | Yes, I do. |
I understand what you mean, and obviously the definition of "legacy" is a bit fuzzy. | |
Sunanda 18-Mar-2009 [811] | Using Peter's code (thanks again!), I've made two changes to the download-a-script link: 1. if we find UTF-8 chars in a script, we download it with the HTTP content type charset=utf-8 But that probably makes no practical difference. A downloaded script will be saved by the browser, and then opened by a text editor. The text editor is unlikey to be passed the charset setting. So: 2. Scripts with UTF-8 encoding are downloaded with a few lines of comment at their top. The comment explains the possible problem. Thanks to all for the comments and help with getting things this far. |
Anton 19-Mar-2009 [812x2] | Sundanda, good job, I was hoping you'd do that, and you did. |
I'm interested in the utf-8 detection function. Can it be published? | |
Maxim 20-Mar-2009 [814x2] | sunanda: I have a feature proposal for you :-) it would be nice to be able to supply a single picture to link with the scripts. this image (jpg, png, gif) would have hefty size limitation and I think only one image per script should be enough, but having this alongside the various listings of the application and within searches, new scripts, etc would be really cool. sometimes, if you see a thumbnail (ui grab, console example, logo, output gfx, whatever), it will help raise people's curiosity. this could probably benefit quite a few scripts, which are possibly overlooked. having a simple search filter of scripts with pics, could also help people to quickly find usefull things at a glance. what do you think? it could start out really simple, and slowly thumbnails could creep into various listings of scripts. |
maybe, we could eventually have more than one picture, like pics which are specifically tagged as gui screenshots, for example. | |
Sunanda 20-Mar-2009 [816] | Nice idea, thanks ..... Let me think about it. |
Maxim 20-Mar-2009 [817] | cool, let me know if you want to test it, I'll be happy to supply imgs for my scripts. |
Alan 22-Mar-2009 [818] | re:pictures. Some but not all scripts also have docs, so that might be a good place to add them.For those that don't,a clickable small thumbnail? |
Maxim 26-Mar-2009 [819] | you mean add the pictures at the header of docs? or allow us to use the pics within the docs? |
Sunanda 26-Mar-2009 [820x3] | Max, I assumed you meant have the pic on the main page for the script, eg for liquid.r you'd see a thumbnail here: http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=liquid.r |
That's a nice idea, though there are some technical CSS issues......For example, the actual script is displayed in a <pre> block. That means images may not float where you'd expect them. It'll take some experimentation to find the best way to do it. | |
....Maybe a better slot for a thumbnail would be in the LHS menu, just under the <Script Library Home> link. That would keep it out of the flow of the page. Please suggest better ideas :-) | |
mhinson 14-Apr-2009 [823] | Hi, I am very new to Rebol so appologies if my questions are very simple. I have been trying to use functions & examples from the library by pasting them into the REBOL/View console. When I do this I find most of them produce errors or lock up the console so I have to restart it. What am I doing wrong please? Is there some trick to this that is so obvious that no one has mentioned it? Thanks, |
Pekr 14-Apr-2009 [824] | give me an example of such script. The thing might be, that some scripts are already dated, but most of them should work ... |
sqlab 14-Apr-2009 [825x2] | There are two file versions in the library, one for viewing, one for downloading. Did you use the one from http://www.rebol.org/download-a-script.r?script-name=....r Maybe the other ones have problems. |
Mike I checked your library example from the I'm new group producing errors. There is probably a weakness, as the script does not regard comment lines. A short enhancement would be parse-ini-file: func [ file-name [file!] /local ini-block current-section parsed-line section-name ][ ini-block: copy [] current-section: copy [] foreach ini-line read/lines file-name [ if #";" <> first ini-line [ ; do not process comment lines section-name: ini-line error? try [section-name: first load/all ini-line] either any [ error? try [block? section-name] not block? section-name ][ parsed-line: parse/all ini-line "=" append last current-section parsed-line/1 append last current-section parsed-line/2 ][ append ini-block current-section current-section: copy [] append current-section form section-name append/only current-section copy [] ] ;; either ] ] ;; for append ini-block current-section return to-hash ini-block ] | |
Sunanda 15-Apr-2009 [827] | Thanks, sqlab......That works fine. (I should read the documentation in future before writing the script :) I've updated the script in the Library: http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=parse-ini.r |
mhinson 15-Apr-2009 [828] | Thanks for your attenton to my questions. It seems I stumbled across the need for support of comments in ini files. I was also trying to cut & paste from the viewing version of some scripts, rather than the download version as I did not realise there was a destinction. It is also possiable that my cut & pastes were not complete perhaps, as the scripts that would not run like that before seem to work ok now. I notice that a lot of things show anomolous behaviour when used by inexperienced users who lack confidence. It is like they know who they can play tricks on, & who won't stand for it. |
Sunanda 15-Apr-2009 [829] | Cut'n'paste ought to work. Though the download format is safer as it has been less processed (no escaping of embedded HTML codes etc). I can sympathise -- I generally notice _any_ new device I buy (from computers to wrist watches) won't work for the first half hour or so, But as soon as I start to think that either it's defective, or I am very stupid, then it starts to play fair. Animism is still a good first attempt at understanding the universe :-) |
Maxim 28-Apr-2009 [830x5] | sunanda, sorry I missed the post where you added image support! wow. will check it out immediately. |
sorry, misread the post... you where asking for comments... not saying you did it hehehe. | |
yes, in the script description above the start of the script, under the : [View in color] [View discussion [1 post]] [License] [Download script] [History] [Other scripts by: moliad] menu... just a list of uploaded images with a one line caption when you click on it, showing the full image. obviously, you should impose strinct size limits, enforcing proper compression. and potentially a maximum size. | |
strinct = collation of stringent and strict ;-D | |
I meant to say "merge of" | |
Sunanda 29-Apr-2009 [835] | Thanks Maxim, that's helpful.......Not sure when I can start twiddling with something like that, but it's on my list. |
Maxim 29-Apr-2009 [836] | cool |
Sunanda 24-Jun-2009 [837] | Just replied to a Feedback message sent to REBOL.org about the Script Library: > When will the current script library "die"? [The questioner suggests that R3 incompatibilities may mean we simply purge all R2 scripts to create an R3-only Library] My response...... Thanks for the question. The simple answer is: I hope never. *** Coincidentally, I have just started an exercise in seeing how many of my contributions to the Script Library will port with few or no changes. The results are encouraging so far: http://www.rebol.org/art-display-article.r?article=j26z I know some of my scripts will be obsoleted by R3. They can stay in the Library as R2-only resources. I am hoping many of the rest will be code compatible between R2 and R3, so they will work either way. *** Ladislav has also commented on his early porting experience: http://www.rebol.org/art-display-article.r?article=w24v There is some discussion of the issue on the REBOL3 AltME world: http://www.rebol.org/aga-display-posts.r?post=r3wp453x15753 *** The Library has a flexible tagging method for scripts, see: http://www.rebol.org/st-topic-index.r We can very easily add tags for (say) R3-ready R2-only Or whatever seems the best set to help partition the scripts into R2, R3, or both. Hope that helps a little! |
BrianH 24-Jun-2009 [838x2] | The Needs header works in R3, and is only checked on DO, not LOAD. |
The explicit named Needs loads modules rather than checks components, but the straight version Needs works the same. | |
Sunanda 24-Jun-2009 [840] | I'd noticed that change -- it's a good one, thanks. |
Sunanda 25-Jun-2009 [841] | As Carl mentioned in Announcemements: www.rebol.org is being moved by the ISP to a faster server. I'm not sure they understand what's really involved, so it is very likely that the site is going to break. I'm just going to set the site to read-only, as I am not sure they will be able to backup and copy everything while we are adding ML posts, scripts etc. I hope normal service wiill be resumed asap! |
Sunanda 26-Jun-2009 [842] | REBOL.org died last night because: -- the ISP copied the entire site in preparation for a server migration -- that doubled our disk usage ..... and took us over our disk space quota -- so all file writes failed -- but they failed by writing zero byte length files. result data loss and corruption of indexes We are now restored and back up and running. The server migration is still to come. As Carl says, it may break things in other ways. |
Janko 26-Jun-2009 [843] | uh? .. so you lost all data or a part of it or none? |
Sunanda 26-Jun-2009 [844] | We lost no data. But we lost the site for a little while.....Little things like this built up: -- you try to login -- we update your last-active time -- but that file write completely trashed your user-profile record Or: -- we upload some more posts from this AltME world -- as we write them into our index data structures, it corrupts the index, thus making the whole AltME archive unavailable. Corrupt-on-write is a hard mode to recover from :-) |
Janko 26-Jun-2009 [845] | huh.. writes failing by zeroing files is a thing that can cause quite few problems .. haven't been aware of that |
Graham 26-Jun-2009 [846] | IOS used to do that ... |
Ashley 27-Jun-2009 [847] | Just tried logging on without success ... is this due to the above problems or do I require a password reset? (I've got a couple of useful scripts I finaly want to upload). |
Anton 27-Jun-2009 [848x2] | Sunanda, any idea what the ultimate cause for those corrupted file writes was? |
(Oh - I re-read what you wrote above: your disk quote was exceeded by the backup.) | |
PeterWood 27-Jun-2009 [850x2] | Ashley: Are you still having problems logging on? I can log on. |
I checked the user list and "Ashley" isn't displayed. This could be or one of three reasons: 1. You requested privacy when you first joined. 2. You used another name. 3. You membership expired If I remember correctly memberships can expire if you haven't added a script to the library and haven't logged in to the site in the last six months. | |
Ashley 27-Jun-2009 [852] | I think that last one was the reason. |
Sunanda 28-Jun-2009 [853] | Ashley's in, and adding scripts! http://www.rebol.org/cpt-list-scripts.r?user-name=ashley |
btiffin 1-Jul-2009 [854] | Yayyy! The 2008 rebol Of The Year posts the 900th script. And great big round of Yayyyy! |
Sunanda 9-Jul-2009 [855] | REBOL.org just migrated from the world's slowest single server to a small load balanced cluster. Sadly, we're not superfast, but its early days yet. One cosmetic problem: we're showing the date as 6 hours out. Highly trained techies are working to resolve that. Other than that, it was a smooth move, mainly handled by the ISP. |
Maxim 10-Jul-2009 [856] | just noticed that downloading scripts seems to add a .txt extension after the .r so you get script.r.txt |
older newer | first last |