World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Volker 31-Jul-2006 [1104] | Better to patch and continue and then tell RT what the bugs are and possible solutions. |
Pekr 31-Jul-2006 [1105x2] | Well, if community is a bit tight, then I would expect a more tighter relationship ... the thing is, that even blogging slowed down, and sometimes we can see blog posts, just buying Carl a bit more time imo :-) |
one thing I don't understand fully is, that many blog articles open some questions, ppl are invited to discuss, yet I miss some decisions being made. Hmm, they surely are made, but without single statement, so we just can guess, how e.g. Unicode (and other things) will, or will not, be supported ... | |
Ingo 31-Jul-2006 [1107x6] | Yeksoon: Those are all companies I don't care about, so what? |
;-) | |
And for me not shipping isn't a major problem ... | |
... not COMMUNICATING is! | |
As Pekr has said, there are questions raised on the blogs, people answer, and that's that. Just a big black hole where everything disappears seemingly forever. | |
RebServices, RebCode, they are released as a preview, people are asked to use them and tell about problems they find. And then what? | |
Henrik 31-Jul-2006 [1113] | and then they'lll probably get fixed at some point |
Pekr 31-Jul-2006 [1114] | :-) |
Pekr 3-Aug-2006 [1115] | if gurus are silent, not blogging, then we have to help ourselves somehow - this one is from ML, someone communicated with Carl :-) Just a thought, but I sent an email to Carl asking if REBOL 3.0 would have an embeddable component to it. His reply was: Thank you for your message... Yes. We call that embedded REBOL, and that method will be supported by our REBOL 3.0 product. -REBOL Support |
Gabriele 4-Aug-2006 [1116] | the latest sdk already has a rebol.dll (undocumented), and that's supposed to happen for 3.0 too (i.e. to allow the browser plugin). so no news actually. :) |
Graham 4-Aug-2006 [1117] | rebol.dll is the same as view.dll |
Pekr 4-Aug-2006 [1118x2] | probably so, Gabriele just wants to tell, that is is the embeddable rebol already, although undocumented ... |
maybe Gabriele could ask Carl to prepare some status update? I think ppl would like to have more clearer image on the shcedule slip, than to read about problems with MacBook :-) | |
Pekr 7-Aug-2006 [1120x3] | Gabriele/Ladislav - could you please ask Carl for some R3 blog entry, providing us with some status update? |
Ladislav mentioned on ml, that he invited RT to discuss portability issues, maybe ppl would welcome some status update too ... we don't fear missing the schedules, as it happens with sw project, but imo ppl would deserve to know some status from time to time ... | |
thanks :-) | |
Gabriele 7-Aug-2006 [1123] | there will be a status update, soon. |
Pekr 7-Aug-2006 [1124] | ok, thank you ... |
Henrik 7-Aug-2006 [1125] | I wonder with portability, when it will be time to discuss how to port r3? I remember hearing that it would be possible for 3rd party developers to do their own port |
Pekr 7-Aug-2006 [1126x5] | hmm, not sure .... |
I understood it as follows - R3 will be componentised, RT keeps language (merely a dll), the rest is nearly open ... now the question is, how much is "the rest" :-) | |
I think that there was talk about console, some parts of View, so not sure ... | |
maybe the easier porting will be because there will be nothing like mysql driver inside etc. | |
but - those are just my speculations ... | |
Tomc 7-Aug-2006 [1131] | http://www.rebol.net/article/0284.html |
Pekr 17-Aug-2006 [1132] | hehe, I noticed original R3 announcement doc was updated too on August-7. Now we at least know, what "Long Term" means - the document states Carl would like to see alpha available sometimes in the Fall 2006..... |
Graham 17-Aug-2006 [1133x2] | when's that in months? |
October? | |
Pekr 17-Aug-2006 [1135x2] | difficult to say ... I just wonder, as for alpha, how it happened that first educated guess of author was half a year off? :-) |
anyway - let's say it will be 2006 .... 2007 is gonna be the year of R3, and IIRC 10nth anniversary of Rebol. Devcon 2007 is going to be great I think :-) | |
Ladislav 21-Aug-2006 [1137x3] | What do you think about this test? ; local variable stability [ repeat i 2 [i: 1] ] |
it is interesting, that FOR is able to pass this test: >> for i 1 2 1 [i: 1] == 1 | |
Now the question is, what behaviour we prefer | |
MichaelB 21-Aug-2006 [1140] | the repeat version, as this is what I would expect and call intuitive ... the word 'i gets bound to the block and is always being reset - so an infinite loop so 'for seams to not care or at least keeps the state of 'i for it's own purposes - how should a user know this, even though some assignment like this might flag in most cases a programming error (and in the other case in a for loop one can't manipulate the state of 'i explicitely) |
Henrik 21-Aug-2006 [1141] | I would definitely prefer that 'i is bound to the block. You might want to do adjustments to 'i during the loop, although I don't really use that, but sometimes it can be useful with variable stepping or resetting. |
Anton 21-Aug-2006 [1142] | Yes I prefer repeat too, (my initial thought, at least). Were the bugs/issues with FOR ever fixed ? I can't remember now. |
Cyphre 21-Aug-2006 [1143] | I also vote for the REPEAT behaviour. |
Ladislav 21-Aug-2006 [1144] | Were the bugs/issues with FOR ever fixed ? - no |
Pekr 21-Aug-2006 [1145] | and will there be? :-) |
Ladislav 21-Aug-2006 [1146] | maybe ;-) |
Pekr 21-Aug-2006 [1147] | well, surely, such thing is not main priority in such big task as R3 is :-) |
Volker 21-Aug-2006 [1148] | Silly idea: how to use 'protect for the loop-var? is that to expensive? |
Jerry 21-Aug-2006 [1149] | I would like to know the difference between action! and native!. Thanks! In Carl's REBOL 3 Blog Article #0039, he says that the ordinal functions (first, second, ...) are of the action! type in REBOL 2, and will be of native! type in REBOL 3. |
Gabriele 22-Aug-2006 [1150x2] | actions are like "methods" (if you are familiar with OOP languages) for values. |
i.e. insert series value is like series.insert(value) in oop languages. | |
Pekr 22-Aug-2006 [1152] | and series.insert(value) will not be true in the native instead of action type? |
Gabriele 22-Aug-2006 [1153] | a native is more like a C function, an action is more like a C++ method. anyway it's mostly an implementation detail. |
older newer | first last |