World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Geomol 7-Jul-2009 [16184x2] | Maybe strict-lesser? is a needed function? ;-) |
(I need to think about it some more.) | |
BrianH 7-Jul-2009 [16186] | If you need to do exact comparisons with floating point numbers you need to use subtraction and comparison to 0.0 - it's the only way to be sure. Exact comparisons with floating point numbers have to take into account that the numbers themselves are not exact the vast majority of the time. |
Sunanda 9-Jul-2009 [16187] | A little sameness oddity for Ladislav. Two identical tuples can have different last elements :-) >> (to-tuple "1") = 1.0.0 == true >> (last to-tuple "1") = last 1.0.0 == false |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16188] | That's an error in TO tuple!. |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16189] | hmm, also first second last give strange results. First works, but others don't .... |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16190] | Having trouble parsing that sentence - code? |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16191] | Don't understand ... |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16192] | Nevermind, I got it. I'm writing the ticket now. |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16193] | Carl asked me to ask, what is general opinion to my suggestion - to remove parse /all refinement altogether. Current proposal is to swith parse by default to /all mode for block rules, and to recent default behaviour for string rule. As for myself I don't mind compatibility, so I prefer removing /all refinement and switching pase internally to /all mode .... |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16194] | I proposed an /ignore stuff option that would replace the old default behavior, and be more general. Then we could toss /all. |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16195] | That tuple bug applies also to R2 ... will such bugs be fixed? |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16196x2] | Not in R2, unless we can prove that code won't be broken. We have a lot of incompatible fixes of R2 problems in R3.. |
Submitted as bug#1069. | |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16198] | What do you think about current progress? Progress is imo great, but when do you think we will get to more strategic parts like Plugins, etc? |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16199x2] | I think pretty soon. That got delayed because Ladislav and meijeru started being really thorough about reporting inconsistencies in the core semantics of the language, so we started working on resolving those in case any changes affect the rest of the system. For instance, the equality change includes changing the equality actions to natives, which changes the action list - that might affect plugins. |
Removing binary! from any-string! definitely would affect plugins. It affected everything else - there's a lot less buggy code now :) | |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16201] | That is good to hear :-) Was there any resolution to various make methods? Will we be able to precisely decide, what gets copied and what gets referenced? |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16202] | That is still pending, but the discussion about that reached a consensus, so it will come after we finish up the equality changes. |
Sunanda 9-Jul-2009 [16203] | re tuple.... ....I thought it technically was not a bug. Just a surprise that is explicable when you remember that tuples are padded with zeroes for equality tests: 1.0.0 = 1.0.0.0 == true (length? 1.0.0) = length? 1.0.0.0 == false |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16204x4] | It turns out that the length of a tuple is set at tuple creation time, and that length affects LENGTH? and PICK, which are called by LAST. |
It was technically not either a bug or a feature - it was a side effect that had not been discussed. The bug ticket will start the discussion | |
The amount of space a tuple takes is fixed, as are the trailing zeros. The "length" is just a number. | |
The result of all of these discussions is that R3 is going to be much more rigorously thought through and consistent than R2. The little improvements are going to be the ones with the greatest impact in the long run. | |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16208] | Brian - I don't understand proposal for invalid-utf-8 function. What is it good for? Is it about some binary code not being able to be converted to regular char? |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16209] | It's about finding UTF-8 encoding errors, particularly the overlong forms that are used for security breaches. We can't do that check in TO-STRING because of the overhead (+50%), but it can still be a good idea to check in some cases, and the code is better written in C than REBOL. |
Pekr 9-Jul-2009 [16210] | That is what came to my mind - if to-string should not care itself. Well, not even sure it is about to-string, but about particular decoder? |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16211] | TO-STRING is the primary decoder of UTF-8 in REBOL.. TO-CHAR is the other one, and it complains about invalid UTF because it can. |
Sunanda 9-Jul-2009 [16212] | How do I get stack to do anything useful? I assume I have to enable it with system/options/debug or secure But just poking around has not found the magic words (ditto, web searching). |
BrianH 9-Jul-2009 [16213x2] | You mentioned the security, but the trick is that STACK is undocumented and you have to poke around and try things out for it to work. To my knowledge, I am the only one who has come up with proof-of-concept code that uses STACK, but the concepts proven were meant to highlight security holes :( |
I haven't tried out all of its options yet either. | |
Sunanda 10-Jul-2009 [16215] | Stack has teaser documentation, but the examples no longer seem to work: http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0075.html |
Pekr 10-Jul-2009 [16216] | A70 released. GUI demo runs once again ... |
PeterWood 10-Jul-2009 [16217] | ... is that on Windows only? |
Pekr 10-Jul-2009 [16218x2] | dunno ... |
http://www.rebol.com/r3/downloads.html- Win and Linux this time. I expect non-Win platforms being Core only too ... | |
amacleod 10-Jul-2009 [16220] | Great to see GUI Demo back up...even "text view" demo works now... I saw Carl made some more changes to GUI not yet included in build. Any ideas on what changed? |
Henrik 11-Jul-2009 [16221] | the changes are not yet implemented. the layout system will be changed to contain a guide system and multiple layers. if it works, there will not be any more trouble with the layout engine. |
Graham 11-Jul-2009 [16222] | I hope we can dictate into these text entry fields ... windows speech recognition is apparently quite good. |
Henrik 11-Jul-2009 [16223] | if it works like a generic keyboard, then you should be able to do it in R2 as well. try putting up a view layout [field] and see if it works. |
Graham 11-Jul-2009 [16224] | It works under Vista, but can't get it to work under Windows 7 |
Henrik 11-Jul-2009 [16225] | why am I not surprised... tried other non-native programs? |
Graham 11-Jul-2009 [16226x2] | Yes .. they don't work either ( Chrome ) |
Curiously IE8 is okay. | |
Henrik 11-Jul-2009 [16228] | I wouldn't be surprised if they made it so it won't work in other than through certain APIs. |
Graham 11-Jul-2009 [16229x3] | Having the OS vendor also an application vendor is the problem. |
They should split up MS like they did to the Bells | |
But is speech an OS thing or an application? | |
Henrik 11-Jul-2009 [16232] | It should most definitely be an OS thing. It should work like generic keyboard input. There would, though, be two kinds of input: One for dictation and one for GUI control. The latter might be harder to do in REBOL without some OS friendly extensions. |
Graham 11-Jul-2009 [16233] | It's more sophisticated than just keyboard input. It can be used to select words, undo selections etc |
older newer | first last |