World: r3wp

jpeg looks clean and displays proper everywhere else

there is a strange bug in view where face with edges need a color 
to be specified.  if color is none I've seen screwy thing happen 
with the edges.

but this just happens in some parent/child face nesting circumstance 
which I don't recall.

I'll try some other pics tomorrow night...its got to be something 
with the jpeg..

try making sure each face has a color, if you see the problem again, 
with another image.

Why only that computer and only when encapped is my question..


The work computer is FDNY property and locked down somewhat so its 
hard to debug if its the computer's issue...

to me its the "only when encapped" part which is the strangest!

Especially if the image is part of the binary

it is

Is the offending system set to use large fonts, or does it have a 
funky video setting (different DPI) that might be the culprit?

The screen does look off (aspect and resolution wise) but I can't 
check as the display properties access seems to be locked down for 
security...

In my old VB days, large fonts was a major bugbear.

That may also be the problem...some of the officers have bad eyes 
and may have increased font size..I'll check it out. Thanks for the 
hints Gregg.

New element to the puzzle....


I got it to work on the offending machine but only if the app is 
NOT located on the desktop. When placed in its own folder under c: 
it works fine.

that is totally weird!

There might be some unusual disokay properties set but I do not have 
access to them it seems...

display = disokay

the only problem I've ever had with apps on the desktop is with the 
spaces in the file path.

I check for desktop and warn users that the app might not run correctly.

Graham, you have had issues running from desktop?  or is that your 
advice?

Yes, issues running from desktop ... so don't advise it .. and I 
specifically check for desktop installation and alert user not to 
do this ...

Is this a bug in rebol encap? Or do other platforms have this same 
issue?

Not sure where to put this so asking here:


I downloaded a web script and it has a  snippet I don't understand:
buffer: make string! 1024         ;; contains the browser request
file: "index.html"
parse buffer ["get" ["http"  |   "/ "  |  copy file to " " ]]

what does:

copy file to " "

mean or do?
tia

copies everything after the http till it reaches a space to a variable 
named file

or after the "/" if there is no http

eh ... no that either

everything after get that is not / or http ...

Moved the question to Parse.

[ copy question to end ( append parse-channel question)  ]

From the new products page:

REBOL Technologies has changed its product catalog. REBOL/Command 
features are now part of REBOL/SDK. We've eliminated the standard 
REBOL/SDK. We also will be lowering our pricing for these products 
accordingly. 


How does this affect current sdk owners? Can we download command 
sdk and use with our key?

well, the corrollary of that is .. do existing sdk/command users 
get a refund ...

Well, generally when you buy a TV 1000$ and the price get to down 
to 800$ 2 month later, the shop does not refund the difference. So 
why RT whould ?
Or maybe just those who buy this month (if there is some) !

That was my point ...

But there are some stores that do!

And they're the ones who have loyal customers forever :)

Yes but only if you bought the TV a short time before tre price goes 
down. Not years.

Is this longest period we have not had a SDK follow a new release?

New 2.7.7 SDK release: http://www.rebol.com/sdk.html

where's the download link?

i think you must ask for it !!!!

but it's very sad, we must paid for the upgrade even if you buy the 
sdk before last year !!!!

perhaps, it will be a good idea to make a link with purchase condition 
for sdk buyer before last year.

I still hope it is an ommision? SDK does not imo contain license 
key, and it was always available to download IIRC.

Not always, just in recent years.

This need to purchase the sdk if you bought it over a year ago seems 
a little arbitrary ... normally this implies that there has been 
a year's worth of upgrades and fixes over the one year period, but 
the last sdk release was over 2 years ago.

I would want a clear upgrade system. For some reason I ignored the 
yellow box at the top. Now it's more clear, but I still think it 
needs some work.

Graham, in principle, Carl could be speculating in not doing upgrades 
for 366 days, which I think is too easy to perceive as sinister. 
Everyone else do it on version numbers, not time period. Time periods 
are used during the final weeks before an upgrade, so a purchase 
right before an upgrade doesn't seem unreasonable.


Also he says "within the last year", but from what specific date? 
Is this a one time offer?

Looking at the changes http://www.rebol.com/docs/changes-2-7.html
is there really any need to upgrade to 2.7.7 ?

We can add the mezzainine stuff ourselves

So, really it makes it even more pointless charging for the upgrade