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

World: r3wp

[Script Library] REBOL.org: Script library and Mailing list archive

Sunanda
22-Jul-2009
[874x2]
Thanks Graham.

Paging for AltME archive.....We only put the basics in place. It 
is certainly improvable.

Meanwhile, you can make great leaps if you are happy to edit the 
end of the URL ....

... eg 16273 is the post number for group 453 of world R3WP. Change 
the 16273 to move quickly:
http://www.rebol.org/aga-display-posts.r?post=r3wp453x16273
The email obsfucation is based on Andrew's  code. Improvements are 
welcome!
http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=uri.r


Meanwhile, we do not obsfucate if you are logged on. So log on for 
a better browsing experience.
Graham
22-Jul-2009
[876x3]
Looking at that script, I suspect you can change the definition for 
user so that it excludes //
or not ..
well, I guess the obfuscation is fair enough since it's a user/password 
combination
Barik
6-Aug-2009
[879x2]
Hi all. I've got an issue in REBOL2. I have a Win32 DLL (using library/load) 
that has an argument of char**. What does my make routine! need to 
look like to be able to handle this?
Hmm, I just realized library group was for the script library, not 
for library/load and DLL related questions. Oops.
Sunanda
6-Aug-2009
[881]
No problem.....The flaw is really in AltME: we should be able to 
move posts around to the right group.
Barik
6-Aug-2009
[882x2]
What's the appropriate group to ask my question do you think
Core?
Sunanda
6-Aug-2009
[884]
BrianH suggests DLL.SO
Barik
6-Aug-2009
[885]
Okay, I'll give it a shot there, thanks.
Geomol
21-Aug-2009
[886]
Is it possible to search the library for something like: "func [:"
I only need results, where the string "func [:" is included.
Sunanda
21-Aug-2009
[887]
Sorry, no there is not -- not online anyway.

You could download all the scripts and do a search locally with a 
few lines of REBOL code 
http://localhost/cgi-bin/download-librarian.r
(the scripts will all be in the /scripts/ folder)
Geomol
21-Aug-2009
[888x3]
Thanks!
It doesn't seem, functions with get-word refinements are used very 
much.
Not refinements, get-word arguments.
Gregg
21-Aug-2009
[891]
They are very rare.
Maxim
26-Aug-2009
[892]
is the site built using only nested table elements?
Sunanda
26-Aug-2009
[893]
Good news -- no absolutely positiioned DIVs, so it is a fairly fluid 
layout, will flow easily into most window size.


Bad news -- main frame of site is a table. Originally, it was nested 
DIVs but that caused some layout problems when displaying <pre> sections 
of code. Going to a table was a quick fix that has never been looked 
at again.
Maxim
26-Aug-2009
[894x2]
divs really cause sooooo much browser display issues.... tables usually 
are easier to manage.
ok , I'll give it a try for fun...  :-)
Graham
26-Aug-2009
[896]
Max, given up already on the json library?? :)
Maxim
26-Aug-2009
[897]
I'm almost done doing my lean rebol to JSON converter...  and its 
been tested using an html and javascript  test, so its output is 
valid.
Graham
26-Aug-2009
[898]
In that case, fnished so soon??
Maxim
26-Aug-2009
[899]
sunanda, you might want to add an "extension" section to rebol.org 
where we may contribute C/C++ code to rebol.org... what do you think?


for tutorials and small projects it might be very usefull as a tool 
to help out other people into understanding how to use the extension 
API.
Sunanda
26-Aug-2009
[900]
It's possible....But may take a while.

For now, you could publish extension code on REBOL.org as an article 
(or series of articles).
Pekr
26-Aug-2009
[901]
Guys, is there any strategy of how to distinguish R2 vs R3 script 
base? I know that there are header/library fields available, but 
apart from that, I expect almost zero compatibility between R2 and 
R3 script base, and users might be confused, why scripts don't work 
for them? Would R2 vs R3 script-base split be a good idea?
Sunanda
26-Aug-2009
[902]
The strategy is:

-- allow scripts to be tagged as (say) r3-ready,. r3-only, r2-only
-- allow searches to be limited to specific tags
-- perhaps highligh in searh results the R2/R3 status.
The first two steps are already in place.
Sunanda
25-Sep-2009
[903]
Something new in the Library....If you own scripts, you can add images 
to them to make it all a bit more graphic.

Only example to date here:
    http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=ascii-chart.r

Notes about how to add images to yoour scripts here:
    http://www.rebol.org/boiler.r?display=script-images

Thanks to Maxim for the original change request.
amacleod
25-Sep-2009
[904]
very nice touch
AdrianS
26-Sep-2009
[905]
looks good - it might be useful to impose the actual dimensions of 
the three sizes for consistency. I suppose the submitted images could 
be scaled after uploading, but it might help the uploader to know 
the sizes so that he could take them into account and maybe crop 
the images, if needed.
Maxim
13-Dec-2009
[906]
rebol.org should have a new tag added:

 R3


since R3 just about every R3 scripts are incompatible with R2 it 
would be nice to have reference to what R3 scripts are available 
on rebol.org.


I ask this cause I want to upload an R3 BNF -> Parse grammer converter 
and I see no way to make it explicit in the gui that its an R3 script.
Reichart
13-Dec-2009
[907]
Agreed.
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[908]
Anyone can add any tag to scripts....Click the [edit tags] link when 
logged on and looking at a script.
   http://www.rebol.org/boiler.r?display=st-edit-tags-help
Maxim
13-Dec-2009
[909x3]
ok, so my guess is to add r3 as a library *interface* supported tag 
in the left columns.
there is a tagged called r3-ready, but that doesn't rule out its 
a r3 only script.
so possibly the best would be to make it a standard like:

r3//only
r3//compatible
r3//incompatible
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[912]
Sounds good -- go for it!!
Chris
13-Dec-2009
[913]
Is it not sufficient to set a minimum 'needs header?
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[914]
Once we have a few with an R3 tag, it'll make sense to add R3 as 
a menu entry.
Chris
13-Dec-2009
[915]
Seems version-specific tags become obsolete over time..
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[916]
Chris -- that will ensure people have to use thr right .EXE to run 
it.....But not help them select which of the 900+ scripts are R3 
ready already.
Maxim
13-Dec-2009
[917]
chris: some scripts might need 2 but still be compatible with r3... 
right now there is no way to know what (still) works in R3
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[918]
No many tagged yet :)
  http://www.rebol.org/st-topic-index.r?i=r3
Maxim
13-Dec-2009
[919x2]
exactly... but just adding that button in the menu (even if there 
are only on or two script which are tagged atm) will help raise awareness 
about the need to tag stuff and to add new r3 content to rebol.org.


that's just my two cents... right now... rebol.org fives the impression 
it doesn't support r3 at all.  maybe a little post on rebol weekly 
to promote the use of r3 tags and a quiet request to carl to blog 
about it on the r3 blog, where MANY people go for r3 news.
its time to show the world that R3 is starting to be usefull, stable 
and now finally actually better than r2 in few ways.  


Its gotten past the fun "prototype" stage and is now at the usefull 
"it works" stage, even if still alpha/beta
Chris
13-Dec-2009
[921]
But not in a way that looks weird when R2 and R3 roles are flipped.
Maxim
13-Dec-2009
[922]
what do you mean?
Sunanda
13-Dec-2009
[923]
It'd make some sense to add an [R2] tag to all existing scripts (we 
can do that automatically) and/or [R3//untested] tag.

But let's get some [R3] scripts first,  so we have  a_need_ to make 
the distinction.


A couple of my scripts should be tagged as [R3] -- I just never got 
a round tuit:
   http://www.rebol.org/art-display-article.r?article=j26z