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

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

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
[16233x2]
It's more sophisticated than just keyboard input.  It can be used 
to select words, undo selections etc
all dialect driven
Henrik
11-Jul-2009
[16235]
I think what they should have done here, is lift ordinary keyboard 
commands. You would simply say the key names, along with a few extra 
commands, like "again". This way you don't have to remember an entirely 
separate command set.

This is also a problem in MacOSX, because the command set is very 
limited and nearly useless.
Sunanda
11-Jul-2009
[16236]
R3 function for creating objects with default values. Neat!
      object [a: b: c:]
      == make object! [
            a: none
            b: none
            c: none
      ]
PeterWood
11-Jul-2009
[16237]
... and slow!


>> do [st: now/precise loop 10000 [object [a: b: c:]] et: now/precise]
== 11-Jul-2009/23:55:57.406+8:00

>> difference et st
== 0:00:04.36


>> do [st: now/precise loop 10000 [make object! [a: #[none] b: #[none] 
c:#[none]
]] et: now/precise]
== 11-Jul-2009/23:56:13.578+8:00

>> difference et st
== 0:00:00.032
Sunanda
11-Jul-2009
[16238]
That's functions for you :-)
Pekr
11-Jul-2009
[16239]
well, how often do you create 10K objects at once? :-)
Henrik
11-Jul-2009
[16240]
I find it a little strange that it is so slow:

>> source object
object: make function! [[
    "Defines a unique object."
    blk [block!] "Object words and values."
][
    make object! append blk none
]]
Tomc
11-Jul-2009
[16241]
P: well, how often do you create 10K objects at once? :-)
frequently
BrianH
11-Jul-2009
[16242]
It is slow because he reuses the same spec block over and over, which 
means that with every loop iteration another #[none] is added to 
the spec block. This means that the spec block has to be expanded 
many times, with reallocation overhead.


The OBJECT function was meant to be used with specs that aren't reused 
- it's a convenience function for high-level objects, which may be 
replaced by a change to MAKE object! to have an implicit none on 
the end of the spec instead of needing to add an actual one.
Gregg
12-Jul-2009
[16243]
Why not just have it use JOIN internally, rather than APPEND?
Pekr
12-Jul-2009
[16244]
Append is native too, no?
Gregg
12-Jul-2009
[16245x2]
But APPEND changes the spec block, which caused the speed issue Peter 
pointed out.
At this point, I don't see the value in the OBJECT func myself.
Pekr
12-Jul-2009
[16247]
Because of the speed issue?
Gregg
12-Jul-2009
[16248]
No, that's incidental.
Sunanda
12-Jul-2009
[16249]
Yes, looking at object, there are two problems:

  1. it is slow .... though as Gregg says, that looks like it can be 
  fixed by changing its pith to:
                       make object! join blk none

  2, it is unnecessary. I never realised until now that this works 
  fine to set default values:
        make object! [a: b: c: d: none]
BrianH
12-Jul-2009
[16250]
Sunanda, the OBJECT function was one of the language usability tweaks 
we made while writing the R3 GUI code. It is likely that the functionality 
of OBJECT will be added to the MAKE object! handler, at which point 
OBJECT will just be another word for the CONTEXT function. In the 
meanwhile we have already seen the value of it in the GUI source.
sqlab
13-Jul-2009
[16251]
Sub-panels do no longer work with the demo.
The error messages is

** Script error: append2 has no value

** Where: repeat do switch applier apply if foreach if do-face if 
foreach do-tr

ggers switch-panel view-sub-panel do switch applier apply if foreach 
if do-face

if actor all do-style all until do-event do-event do-event either 
applier wake-

p loop applier wait do-events if view catch either either applier 
do try demo
** Near: repeat n 60 [
    append2 blk 'label ajoin ["Field " n]
    ...

** Note: use WHY? for more about this error
PatrickP61
13-Jul-2009
[16252x2]
Yeah, I saw that too, I tracked it down to the APPEND2 command which 
is no longer used in the GUI.R

Instead, it looks like the REPEND command took it's place, but was 
not changed in the DEMO.R
This work-around should fix the demo for sub-panels:


Run R3 as you normally would then type this command:  APPEND2: :REPEND

Then you can run the DEMO.  It is just a quick fix until the DEMO.R 
script is changed.
BrianH
13-Jul-2009
[16254]
That may not work the way you think since REPEND (which has 2 arguments) 
didn't actually take the place of APPEND2 (3 arguments).
Pekr
14-Jul-2009
[16255]
Ah, Carl is preparing to split user and system context. What will 
that mean? Respectively - what is the purpose of such change, to 
have those isolated? Better modularisation?
PatrickP61
14-Jul-2009
[16256]
BrianH,  I thought it was a straigt replacement, but looking closer 
at the code, i do see the change.  Disregard my work-around suggestion.
BrianH
14-Jul-2009
[16257]
Patrick, you can replace APPEND2 with APPEND APPEND.