r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

BrianH
23-Apr-2009
[13458x3]
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
[13491x2]
boring...
it will be delayed until 2010
Henrik
25-Apr-2009
[13493]
and it won't be by not posting in curecode?
Steeve
25-Apr-2009
[13494]
i noticed the same bugs with R2 previously, never been corrected.

I think no one except me want to use those vector functions. I should 
forget it
Henrik
25-Apr-2009
[13495]
I should forget it

 nice attitude. why do you think the bugs haven't been fixed, then?
Steeve
25-Apr-2009
[13496]
It's only corrected if several user or Carl have the same wanting 
hurgently, if not, it will be delayed until the first beta release, 
in some years...
Henrik
25-Apr-2009
[13497]
and it won't be fixed at all if it's not reported to curecode.
Pekr
25-Apr-2009
[13498x3]
Steeve - you are not constructive, sorry. With messages like "boring", 
"pfff", "in some years", please save your comments for yourself then, 
if you don't belive that posting to CureCode and asking for priority 
change might help.
It is exactly attitude like yours, that is becoming boring ...
... at least to ppl, that try to change some things. R3 is simply 
not complete, that is the fact. So - we can either participate (but 
accept the incomplete state), or wait for final release ..
Steeve
25-Apr-2009
[13501x2]
exactly my opinion, i will wait
until the waiting bugs in curecode are all corrected, then i'll post 
new ones, i got new ones, several.
Henrik
25-Apr-2009
[13503]
Steeve, that is the incorrect method. If the bugs are not posted 
NOW, they may be harder to fix when R3 goes beta. We don't know, 
but Carl  has stated several times that when Core issues need to 
be looked in to, we must do that now.
PeterWood
25-Apr-2009
[13504]
I can understand how Steeve feels about posting bugs to CureCode. 
It's very frustrating that when bugs don't get looked at because 
they are not flavour of the day.
Steeve
25-Apr-2009
[13505]
Not my opinion concerning some bugs i found. 

I think they have a lower priority than those, I or other poeple, 
have posted currently.

I want my previous request corrected at first, then i'll come with 
new ones with lower priority.
If you don't agree with that, then find the bugs yourself
Henrik
25-Apr-2009
[13506x2]
Not posting bugs to curecode is a good way to betray the continuing 
development of R3.
And I basically strongly disagree with this method, because a non-posted 
bug report will eventually be forgotten by the person who found the 
bug until years later when it turns up again for a different person. 
It serves no purpose for anyone, not posting the report, including 
the would-be reporter.