World: r3wp

Brian.. I know, I don't complain at all.

map! is brand new. hash! is gone.

ok so hash! is gone perfect no one used it anyway

Shadwolf. No parse, I use hash tables in R2 for dictionaries.

even that's slow no ?

Much more faster than simple block.

The money!, function!, op!, word! and string! types are brand new 
too. No old code in them.

The object! type existed before, as the system/words object. The 
old R2 object! contexts are gone.

Sorry Brian.. it's already possible to use binary as a key in map! 
:)

Just not string! properly :(

I'll tell you, the only thing lower-level than code is code docs. 
I'm so glad Carl took some time to redo the manual :)

And the only thing more important to code organization than modules 
is a good developer communications infrastructure. It has been a 
real boon to have the new chat and DevBase.

Gabriele, a lot of the development process *is* open. Check chat/DevBase 
for details.

chat intergrated i found it complicated to use

And in case it isn't clear, I use R2 every day at work. And I find 
bugs in it pretty often too, and find its limitations frustrating. 
This is why I started the R2-Forward project - so I can write R2 
code with the new R3 functions.

Yes, chat is complex to use, though I find it more useful than AltME 
overall, even in text mode. When we get the GUI it won't even be 
harder to use. That's why we need modules - the code needs reorganization.

Found map! crash - #699

Good catch - upped the priority.

ech.. not just binary related.. works for string as well.

Added a bug for the insert string! into issue! problem Geomol mentioned 
- it hadn't been reported. It is another Unicode display / MOLD bug 
- the data is fine and FORM and PICK work fine. Probably related 
to bug #640.

Upped the priority. POKE of an existing string or binary map key 
fails too.

BrianH: thanks for doing fantastic work here - on every front - real 
developments, testing, prioritising, and explaining here ... Now 
it is even more clear to me, that ppl complaining about lack of development 
are not well informed about the project structure, but it is everybody's 
responsibility to try to be informed - it just needs log-in to Chat 
system, watching blogs, etc. I can understand, that ppl are busy 
with some other things, but then I really suggest to sit and wait, 
as those ppl that contribute, can't work any faster. As can be seen 
even from this single discussion - each developer has his own priorities 
for things to be fixed/finished first, but anyway - R3 is progressing 
well from Alpha to first beta being here in 2009, even if some things 
might be postponed for 3.1 ....

PEkr if there is lack of inforation around developement and who does 
what maybe we have to blame the man in the cave :P

lol

chat system is so complicated OMG ....

there is not lack of information, there is just a general ignorance 
to get to the information.

if the information is not easy to get it's like not having it ...

if the information is easy to get and then people complain then you 
can say they are not  right to complain

but saying they have no right to complain because the information 
exists somewhere and you have to dig half an hour to get it that 
not fair

instead of talking to teh man who saw the man who saw the man who 
maybe saw the bear isn't it better to be able to see directly the 
bear with your own eyes ?

gee - what are you talking about now? Yes, there is Chat, which is 
more a unified replacement of some altme worlds and DevBase CVS, 
but - by info I also mean blogs, bugbase, detailed release notes, 
new docs with changelog, whole rebol.com R3 section, detailed month 
plan focus. I don't want to participate into this discussion anymore, 
as it is really rudiculous ....

but by making so much source of inforamtion you make it are to follow 
or get for people

whoever asks here, gets info from those informed, most importantly 
from BrianH. Now tell me, with other technologies - do you ever get 
so close to the core dev team? And please don't try open source crap 
on me. Python is open-sourced, yet 3.x effort was done by concentrated 
team.

it's like if every tv channels on a day would split the whole news 
and only give 2 information by channel to get the whole thing you 
have to watch them all

yeah that's why ppl ask and maybe get it wrong then on the explanation 
they can get a better idea on what's going on

You don't even know what you are talking about imo - define what 
you want precisely. This vague complaining has no real meaning. I 
could produce tonnes of such general complaints.

I will go so far, that I even think that some part of the community 
became so ignorant, that making R3 fully open sourced would not change 
a bit of this situation. Some real work is needed, and ppl here complain 
that they don't have time to even scan sources of available info. 
Now tell me, how the same ppl are supposed to do any quality code 
for R3, even if it would be open-sourced? Once again - GUI is open-sourced, 
protocols are open-sourced, yet ppl don't even care to test or give 
a feedback.

Pekr easy to say we are bad since the code is closed and only teh 
elected ones can put a hand on it

yoru making my skills in question ? really ? well my head is not 
enough big to think i'm a all mighty guru that's for sure :P

My friend moved to Python (while still using REBOL), claiming it 
is open-sourced. He found some bug, but he was not able nor willing 
to fix it himself. Having sources available was no difference for 
him. He even did not know, where to post bug precisely and he got 
only vague response. Have you ever reported Mozilla or SQLite or 
any other bug? I did. With mozilla it sitted there unfixed for one 
or two years. So please don't tell me, that fully open-sourcing R3 
would make any difference nowadays, when the product is still under 
heavy design and development. Noone claims it is even beta. If RT 
does not release, we complain, if they do release, we complain. Maybe 
Gabriele and Henrik were right in the past - with such public treatment, 
maybe RT should not release until some beta or RC ....

pekr when teh source is wide open and the people are just lazy then 
you can blame them for being loosers but saying they are loosers 
since they can't get hand on the source code is unfair don't you 
think

plus you have to take in note motivation is it affortable to spend 
time in a no one cares and use language ? on extrem thinking you 
can go there too ...

No, I really don't think. I stated it clearly - I have enough experience 
with management to understand current situation and I can tell you 
- having full sources available nowadays would make NO difference 
to speed or quality of R3 development. When product is stable, I 
can imagine how sources do really help ppl to track potential problems, 
provide fixes. But many parts of R3 are simply missing, not yet done. 
Now how many of us here are able to produce the C code quality Carl 
would accept into REBOL anyway? Sooner or later we are going to get 
plug-in interfaces - then we can experiment with some C code extensions 
...

as a matter of fact many people in french community who were really 
moved by rebol stopped about 1 year ago to appear why? most of them 
said they loose their faith in rebol

Shadwolf - open source attribute is not the guarantee of language 
being used. There is plenty of open-sourced stuff out there, which 
is not bigger than REBOL effort ...

Pekr you are talking about having hte source of an unfinished still 
at work thing. And most of us said that once it's official it's better 
to have the source open to not have to wait 1 year to get bug fixes 
or new things

and more the time pass worst is the situation the bugs piles up to 
the sky and you never see the end of fixing them

It's like when carl opens RAMBO some years ago the goal was to get 
some tickets time to time to do some bug fie time to time but as 
teh community worked alot on tracking bugs and doing suggestion the 
number of tickets was massive do you think that's the same thing 
being alone to solve 10  bugs than being alone to solve 4000+ bugs 
?

you contradict yourself. I am not talking about not being open sourced 
at all - I have nothing about open source products. I am just saying, 
that even if R3 would be open-sourced nowadays, the situation would 
not be much different, but some ppl behave like there would be the 
difference. The only difference is in the attitude - some ppl are 
not willing to invest their time = money into closed source product.

many of those bugs are bugs in parts, which are going to be open-sourced.