World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
PatrickP61 12-Apr-2009 [13278] | I have thought of using user.r or Rebol.r as a way to run a script to log my execution of scripts, although I have not done so. I tend to think of those two items as a "hook" where I can execute my own generic code for whatever purpose needed. I have often thought of having either Rebol.r or User.r enforce protect on system words and then make sure Rebol.r or User.r is read only, but there may be other ways to do this better. I am still new to rebol. |
Izkata 12-Apr-2009 [13279] | as to %user.r - my only use for it is so that certain functions I've defined that I use a lot (pad, time, fold, Logfile object, etc) are automatically loaded in any script I want them in, as well as a terminal session. |
Anton 12-Apr-2009 [13280] | BrianH: I use user.r for a few little things, but mainly I get it to call my anton-user.r script. I forget when but there were some instances (when I was on Windows) where rebol would overwrite user.r (testing a fresh rebol beta?). That's why I decided to get all my code out of it and just DO my anton-user.r script from it. On linux I also set system/options/home where I want (not the user directory). I don't change environments much. All new rebol executables are placed into the same directory and beaten with a stick until they work using the same user.r and my anton-user.r script. |
Pekr 12-Apr-2009 [13281] | BrianH: I don't agree to your nor Carl's reasoning towards patches: 1) I use custom patch for URL ftp format, which goes probably anti RFC, but is very practical (@, # in username). Putting those things into DevBase is nto an option - it would not be accepted 2) As Carl suggested, building custom rebol.exe is not an option too, because - I don't want tonnes of various rebol.exes around, one adding this thing, another one changing the other thing. 3) This whole thing is not a big deal, I just will have to add do %my-init.r into the beginning of each of my scripts, which sucks though ... |
btiffin 12-Apr-2009 [13282] | BrianH; All my nodes have a %user.r. I define all my comand line shortcuts there. Things like ls: :list-dir dir: :list-dir cd: :change-dir pwd: :what-dir ~: :view-root .: %. ..: %.. scripts: :view-root/library/scripts And those usually work best with GNU/Linux when I just know it'll look in ~/.rebol/view |
BrianH 12-Apr-2009 [13283x4] | Brian, ls, cd and pwd are predefined in R3. We're considering putting in ~ handling in many functions. |
Pekr, the reasoning behind blocking patches is the same reason there is no browser plugin - R2 is insecure, and R3 won't be. Every patch that you can make in your %user.r is what malware running on your system can make with your user permissions. The goal is to have tons of REBOL hosts around. Every application with a plugin interface could have a R3 host as a plugin. R3 is going to be able to generate programs now, not just scripts. It'll be a real development tool. The problem with all this is that being able to patch the runtime using %rebol.r or %user.r, so can anyone else, and you won't know about it. Can you say exploit? We already had a false positive for R3 this year, an old alpha mistakenly marked as malware. We don't want the next time to be for real. The only way to avoid that is to make R3 secure. The way to make something secure is to make the behavior of your code predictable. That means making your requirements explicit. | |
Anton, we are trying to come up with sensible defaults for all of the options. Get in on the conversation in R3 chat :) | |
It will be easy to specify your requirements in R3 - we have modules. Put your patches in a module and either add that module to the Needs header of your script, or include it on the command line, or build it into your host program. Like the SDK but better. | |
Gabriele 15-Apr-2009 [13287] | Petr: there is absolutely no reason to have your #1 as long as REBOL url!s are fixed. |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13288x2] | Gabriele - I know - but do you remember how RT refused to allow dot in the front of email adress, because it went against RFC? :-) Hopefully we can fix it. |
Gabriele - what is the problem with chunked mode of http 1.1 protocol, so that it is currently disabled? Any advice for a set-up, of how to debug it best? What is the chunked mode good for? I am willing to do some tests to track possible problems, so any quick pointer would be fine ... | |
Geomol 15-Apr-2009 [13290] | Pekr, do you have problems with url! now? Doesn't it work as it should? |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13291x2] | Yes, you can't parse ftp://[user-:-email-:-com]:[pass-:-ftp-:-domain-:-com] |
the problem is @ char at the user part ... for R2, I used following code in user.r: net-utils/url-parser/user-char: union net-utils/url-parser/user-char make bitset! #"@" | |
Geomol 15-Apr-2009 [13293] | Ah yes, I remember something about that. I had same problem years ago. The url is correctly recognized as a url, but trying to use it, and it fails. |
Oldes 15-Apr-2009 [13294] | Pekr.. it's not too practical and safe to use urls with passwords. And if you need to connect to ftp with such a user's name, using scheme directly should work |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13295x3] | Oldes - you see? that is exactly that nonsense excuse I am not willing to accept. This whole discussion was started only in regards to planned cancellation of user.r and rebol.r, so I was curious where I put my own patches ... |
so - for me - it is bug in the parser, as such format is clearly allowed and is used daily on many sites, for others, it might not follow some RFC, and we have some workaround (RFC). But with REBOL, which does not use pure aproach here or there anyway, I don't see the reason why such stuff should not be possible. And xy users asking the same question over and over again thru all that years on ML prove me being right ... | |
workaround (RFC) = workaround (Scheme) | |
Geomol 15-Apr-2009 [13298] | It should be fairly easy to make the change in REBOL, that you now do with a patch in user.r. I'm wondering, why it hasn't been corrected? Does it have other consequences? |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13299x2] | no, I think no other consequences. IIRC, I extended that parser by # char too, but don't remember when it was. Remember - user.r and rebol.r are not going to be provided anymore, because of security reasons, so you have to either: 1) add your script into 'needs header for each of your script 2) start your script with special command line option, probably --include (but that does not allow simple double click functionality with associated executable) 3) build your own R3 host executable 4) prey, that your patch is usefull for others, and try to submit it to R3 CVS to be accepted |
... still I hope that at least dialected preferences/init/config files will be possible ... | |
Oldes 15-Apr-2009 [13301] | Geomol.. because there are people which wants to follow RFC! The above Pekr's "patch" is against RFC. One thing is, that you can use chars like @ in user name FTP's scheme. and another is that you cannot use it in URL. But that's not the topic here. The topic is,that Pekr want to modify his system against standarts - then he can use SDK and build his own URL handler. |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13302] | Oldes - no, this is not topic either. The topic was patch system - no matter if any modification goes against standard or not. |
Geomol 15-Apr-2009 [13303] | I'm confused. Time to read some documentation... |
Pekr 15-Apr-2009 [13304] | I can live with above options R3 is going to provide, even if it will not be so simplistic as a R2 aproach. OTOH if it gives us stronger security, I can live with it even more ... I want browser plugin, hence security has to be solid ... |
Geomol 15-Apr-2009 [13305] | From RFC 1738: Within the user and password field, any :", "@", or "/" must be encoded." Pekr, can you get it to work without your patch, if you specify the at sign in the username as %40, like ftp://john%40niclasen.name:[password-:-someserver-:-net] |
AdrianS 15-Apr-2009 [13306] | Petr, chunked transfer mode is useful when an HTTP response is returned and the content length is unknown (for example, it is being dynamically generated from a source which is streaming it out). It can also exist when an HTTP response is being handled by intermediate proxies that could, for example, compress the response for a part of the path to the client. I've seen this on a cell phone where a POST was made with a fixed content length, but the web server received the request as chunked, with no length. |
Gabriele 16-Apr-2009 [13307x4] | Petr: there is a misunderstanding here. REBOL URLs are AGAINST the RFC. That's a bug. |
Re: chunked, I don't know, it was working fine last time I tested it. Something probably has changed in R3 in the meantime. | |
Note, re URL, the bug is not in the parser, the bug is in the URL! datatype. | |
note that ftp://[user-:-email-:-com]:[pass-:-ftp-:-domain-:-com] is WRONG. the correct URL is ftp://user%40email.com:[pass-:-ftp-:-domain-:-com] - but REBOL does not load it correctly. | |
Geomol 16-Apr-2009 [13311] | It would be nice, if the parser auto encoded :, @ and / when needed. |
Janko 16-Apr-2009 [13312] | are there any changes planned in R3 in the way objects work? like if you could have some "static" methods or properties that would not get copied but referenced when one object is derived from another? |
Geomol 16-Apr-2009 [13313x4] | I get second thought about auto encoding. The reason is, if url! have auto encoding of some characters, then it would be expected, that e.g. file! auto encode too. How do you specify a file named % on disk? In R3, you write: %%25 If the % char should be auto encoded, then you should write that filename as: %% But what if your file is named %25 on disk? It's a bit confusing, but what is the best way? Encoding or not? |
Acutally file! does have auto encoding of space. You can specify a filename like this: %"a b" which will give %a b So maybe auto encoding is a good thing in general? | |
url! already auto encode % in R3: >> a%:b == a%25:b | |
But I don't think, it's a valid url according to the standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI_scheme#Generic_syntax | |
Oldes 16-Apr-2009 [13317] | Actually the auto encoding was cousing me some problems some time ago. I'm not sure if it was fixed. Also with the auto encoding urls there is a problem, that for example the second @ char in Pekr's url must not be encoded. |
Geomol 16-Apr-2009 [13318x2] | Yeah. This seems funny! (Output from R3 console.) >> %"@" == %@ >> %@ == %25@ Can you guess the datatypes? |
The first ends with a quotation mark also. | |
Gabriele 17-Apr-2009 [13320] | Geomol: PLEASE NO!!!! The bug that REBOL has is exactly THAT. I beg you guys, please NO! Encoding is there for a reason. If it could be done automatically, there would be no need for encoding! |
Geomol 17-Apr-2009 [13321x2] | Gabriele, so you mean, auto encoding shold be avoided? Should auto encoding be removed from these examples: >> %"a b" == %a b >> a%[b-:-c] == [a%25b-:-c] >> a<>[b-:-c] == [a%3C%3Eb-:-c] My view is, that there is a lot of auto encoding already. If auto encoding should be there, it should be done right in all cases. Else it should be avoided alltogether. This situation with - some auto encoding in some cases but not all - is not good. |
I guess, auto encoding is user-friendly, if it can be done right in all cases. With auto encoding, you don't have to remember all the strange encoding rules for different datatypes (especially url and email). No auto encoding is technical-programmer-friendly. It's for the programmer, who knows all the strange rules and want complete control. It goes beyond url and email. How should a space be represented in an issue! datatype? Like: >> to-issue "a b" == == #a?b Today you just see a question sign, but it's a space in there. | |
BrianH 17-Apr-2009 [13323x2] | That's a bug in issue! formatting.in R3: http://curecode.org/rebol3/ticket.rsp?id=700 |
Though strangely enough that is still better than the R2 behavior. | |
Oldes 17-Apr-2009 [13325x2] | Geomol, yes. I would like to avoid auto encoding. It's exactly the case where I had the problems. If I write file as %"a b" and it's valid file, I prefere to have it samewhen I for example print it |
Instead of auto encoding I would like to see such a basic functions like official url-encode presented in Rebol. (Of course we have our own - another %user.r usage) | |
Geomol 17-Apr-2009 [13327] | I understand the concern against auto encoding. But without it, and with all the datatypes, we have in REBOL, good documentation about what encoding, we have to use for every datatype, is required. |
older newer | first last |