World: r3wp

Unofficially, of course. He's still busy.

I was just wondering, it there is someone else "who know the internals"... 
I know that Cyphre is waiting for new sources from Carl to do something. 
And of course it's good to have a place where one can write message 
to Carl and with a feeling, that Carl will read it one day.

Right now Carl is busy getting things in place to get the source 
out. Then we can discuss native changes that *don't* affect core 
code. We have already been discussing native changes that *do* affect 
core code, here and in R3 chat, a lot lately :)

comment on #632.

Maybe it os not the right place to ask this request, but I would 
like to know if I can get access to the sources for MediaWiki.  If 
it is yes, the next question is How can I get access.  Thx.

hi, i would like to know if carl have a rebol3-db for us within R3 
 like the very good rebDB http://www.dobeash.com/rebdb.html?

Many of us is waiting for diskbased datastore proposed RIF, on this 
you can build any DB schema of your need, other solutions are walking 
this way VBS or Tretbase, but neither finished or general, Cals will 
have final step.

Rebdb is not diskbased, rather memorybased with possibility to read/save 
to disk, no paging etc, otherwise very good.

i think that carl need it for DevBase

until we have a odbc plugin. we need a good diskbased datastore in 
R3

If you look inside devbase you can see kind of DB there, but finally 
it should be a Module with methods, or Protocol with functions both 
simple and for general use IMHO.

It is not problem of ODBC you can have it today in Rebol 2, even 
better use SQLite or MySQL layer you have at hand, but SQL is not 
the only solution

a good demo In My Humble Opinion, will be a CRUD example application 
full R3

that take avantage of all greats features of R3

You can see frm discussion in this thread R3 need to be fixed first

From CRUD you have CRU nowadays

I've just been reading a little about something called Unobtrusive 
Javascript which aims to separate the behavior from the structure 
of html document.  


Doesn't VID suffer with the same problems where behavior is closely 
tied to the structure of the GUI?  And shouldn't we be looking at 
also solving this problem?

So  for instance from the wiki we have this

files: read %*.r

view/across [
    text-list files do [set-face ca read-string pick files value]
    ca: code-area
]

when maybe somet hing this is preferable

actions: [
	tl:.on-click [  [set-face ca read-string pick files value] ]
]

view/across [
    tl: text-list files 
    ca: code-area
]

ignore the double [[ ]]

Couldn't you do something like this, using compose?

actions: [

 my-text-list [set-face my-code-area read-string pick files value]
]

view compose/only [
	my-text-list: text-list files do (actions/my-text-list)
	my-code-area: code-area
]

And the same for every other possible event?

Sure ... but just looking at cleaner ways of doing this separation 
... getting rid of the 'do

It should be pretty easy to write a function that maps an ACTIONS 
block such as the following into a window:

	actions: [
		my-text-list [
			do [set-face ... ]
			"other-event" [ blah blah..]
		]
	]

where "other-event" could be on-click etc..

then the window doesn't have to specify any actions.

But I know what you're saying. You probably want such a function 
built in and used in the examples, so it becomes commonplace.

Yes

Maybe there could be a stylize type of way to deal with actions

Function name and arguments?
set-actions: func [window actions ...

anonymous windows?

I think it should be defined inside the window definition

set-actions view window-spec actions-block

(Assuming VIEW returns the newly created window object.)

modal windows??

(which it does.)

don't return until closed

AFAIK

Ok, so you want the window definition to separate internally into 
two parts.

Essentially:

view [
	; ACTIONS
	my-text-list/action: [set-face ...]

	; STRUCTURE
	my-text-list: text-list data files
]

yes just like a html page

(I'm still sort of using R2 terminology...)

and there's also passing the face correctly to the actions

Well, it should probably be in the reverse order, I suppose. Structure 
is put in place first, then behaviour operates on top of that.

view [
	; STRUCTURE
	my-text-list: text-list data files

	; ACTIONS
	my-text-list/action: [set-face ...]
]

makes it easier for the view layout engine I guess

STRUCTURE
 is actually "NAME-REFERENCE, STRUCTURE, CONTENT"

I'd also like to have it so that we don't have to name objects and 
can point to them based upon order ...

ahh... retract that.

I've spent some time thinking about that in the past, and it's difficult, 
if not impossible.