World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13442] | So far FUNCTOR hasn't really been used, so now is the time to change it if we are going to do so. The variable capture is a must though, since it will be used where the spec can't be specified by the user. |
Anton 23-Apr-2009 [13443] | Oh, now I see what you meant about handlers. |
Ladislav 23-Apr-2009 [13444x3] | yes, that can be used, but I suggest the uninitialized variables to be captured as dynamic, while the initialized be captured as static |
does that make sense? | |
(I mean for your planned use) | |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13447x2] | In general R3 is moving towards specifying handlers as code blocks passed to FUNCT or FUNCTOR with standard specs specified internally. This is their reason for existence. |
BBL, have a meeting :) | |
Anton 23-Apr-2009 [13449x2] | So how would a user, when specifying a handler, which becomes the functor body, specify that a given variable is to be static, and that another variable is to be dynamic? |
If FUNCTOR scans the given body block and treats all variables the same, then that control is lost by the user. Are we happy to lose that control? Maybe FUNCTOR should have the initialization block like Ladislav suggests, and a more specific "handler-func" function be created for the specific handler use Brian is talking about? | |
Ladislav 23-Apr-2009 [13451] | if you are asking me, then the static variables may be captured from the INIT block, all other from the body, but it looks, that BrianH intended to have all variables static in a Functor, except for the variables from the SPEC block |
Anton 23-Apr-2009 [13452x2] | Why couldn't the init block be inside the body block, in first position? |
(.... maybe not such a good idea..) | |
Ladislav 23-Apr-2009 [13454] | yes, then it might be better to use the same approach as the MAKE funtion in R3 seems to use |
Anton 23-Apr-2009 [13455] | I need to sleep on that... |
[unknown: 5] 23-Apr-2009 [13456] | Ladislav, great to see you back!!! Now, tell us where have you been and why gone so long? |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13457x4] | One thing to remember is that these function-building functions will be called a lot, so fast-and-simple is better than complex. |
Ladislav, strangely enough there are also persistent words defined for the words in the spec, if they are set with set-words in the body. You can access them through self. It's just that the spec takes binding priority, so direct access to the words in the spec will be bound to the spec. There are many potential advantages to this, but the main reason this was done was speed. | |
FUNCT works well, but is too slow and has too much overhead. We already had to make one error go away to remove the screen for spec words overhead (see bug#717), but it still has the overhead of a temporary object which we haven't removed yet (see bug#544). If you had FUNCTOR work the way you say, you would have to somehow distinguish words in the persistant object (as specified with init) from words that should be made into locals, which would add back the same overhead that the change referred to in bug#717 got rid of, as REBOL code. This would make FUNCTOR have much less performance than the equivalent code: CONTEXT [var1: 'blah ... SET 'func1 FUNC [...] [...]] | |
In general we are trying to deal with the problem in R2 where many functions were optimized away in high-performance code, so they end up being a waste of space. Many former mezzanines are now native, and many others are changed to make their overall usage more efficient. It's a balance. | |
Steeve 23-Apr-2009 [13461] | Currently, i have a crash when i start the chat with r3-a48 under Vista. Obviously, i can't see what is the bug, And when i try with the previous version i got (a42) i got this error: --- Note: checking for new messages *** RebDev Error: server connection failed, is server down? (server-failed) ** Script error: cause-error-here has no value ** Where: error if unless request-serve if check-msgs check-new make context do catch applier do try chat ** Near: error result We have no way to return in a safe situation and can't guess what is the bug indeed. Is Carl aware of that problem, i didn't see anything related to a crash of a48 when starting the chat ? |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13462x2] | try again |
It works for me. Does this happen every time? | |
Steeve 23-Apr-2009 [13464x6] | Not anymore, but it was like that during 1 hour at least |
damit, i tried during one hour and just when you say: try again, it works.... | |
i have very | |
i have a very bad connection currently, could it be related to some network errors bad managed by the http scheme ? | |
but a crash, geez.... | |
it's violent | |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13470x2] | The HTTP scheme needs a lot of work at the moment - it's a work in process. What is there already works great, but it's incomplete. |
I think error handling is part on the incomplete part. | |
Steeve 23-Apr-2009 [13472x2] | yep but there is more than just a missing part in the error handling, it's crashing rebol, it's bad... |
and i can't say why, there is no given reason | |
BrianH 23-Apr-2009 [13474] | I haven't had the chance to go over the scheme yet, and Gab and Maarten have been busy. |
Pekr 24-Apr-2009 [13475] | New blog posted - http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0193.html- collect-words |
BrianH 24-Apr-2009 [13476x2] | And that might be enogh to implement Ladislav's FUNCTOR - I'll check with Carl first to see if he has any plans for the existing one. |
Ladislav, I've made the case for your FUNCTOR in R3 chat #3726. Join in on the discussion if you like. | |
Steeve 25-Apr-2009 [13478x4] | hey guys, have we a clever way to extract same variables with different values in 2 different objects ? In one word: the difference. I mean, without doing a nasty loop |
i tried, >> difference/skip values-of obj1 values-of obj2 2 but it fails (something wrong with the difference function when values are none!) | |
Please, don't say to me, the only hope is to do a foreach loop. | |
not rebolish | |
Henrik 25-Apr-2009 [13482] | you write VALUES-OF, but do you mean a block of words that are different? |
Steeve 25-Apr-2009 [13483] | you may come with something completly different, i just want the list of variables which have different values |
Henrik 25-Apr-2009 [13484] | now that we have FOREACH on objects, it could be a good time to ask on the blog or in chat. |
Steeve 25-Apr-2009 [13485] | Hey, that's not clever at all |
Henrik 25-Apr-2009 [13486] | I was referring to that the FOREACH change was in the same ballpark as would be required for this to work without making loops. |
Steeve 25-Apr-2009 [13487x3] | even with UNIQUE, i got a stupid result. >> obj2: make obj1: context [a: b: none] [a: 1] == make object! [ a: 1 b: none ] >> unique/skip append body-of obj1 body-of obj2 2 == [ a: none b: none b: none ] what's wrong with all thess bugous functions ? |
/skip doesnn't work at all in INTERSECT, UNIQUE, DIFFERENCE, UNION... | |
pfff.... | |
Henrik 25-Apr-2009 [13490] | please note it in curecode, thanks |
Steeve 25-Apr-2009 [13491] | boring... |
older newer | first last |