World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Nicolas 16-Aug-2009 [16772] | make port! [ spec: make object! [ title: "DNS Lookup" scheme: 'dns ref: dns://www.rebol.net path: none host: "www.rebol.net" port-id: 80 ] scheme: make object! [ name: 'dns title: "DNS Lookup" spec: make object! [ title: none scheme: none ref: none path: none host: none port-id: 80 ] info: none actor: make native! [[]] awake: make function! [[event][print event/type true]] ] actor: make native! [[]] awake: make function! [[event][print event/type true]] state: #{} data: none locals: none ] |
Steeve 16-Aug-2009 [16773] | Geez... >> first wait read dns://www.rebol.net read == 216.240.11.203 >> first wait read dns://216.240.11.203 read == "www.rebol.net" A little bit obfuscated, but it works... |
Henrik 16-Aug-2009 [16774] | Nicolas, VIEW in its built in state doesn't work properly, so do something like this: >> load-gui >> a: load http://arkandis.com/images/blog/google.gif >> b: make gob! [image: a] >> view b |
Nicolas 16-Aug-2009 [16775] | thanks Henrik |
Henrik 16-Aug-2009 [16776] | (This will be much easier in the future, I hope) |
Paul 16-Aug-2009 [16777] | I see Carl is going to add Read/Text functionality with UTF conversion. That is going to be sweet. That alone should begin to make REBOL3 useful. |
Sunanda 16-Aug-2009 [16778] | What is the point of /any on dir? As far as I can see, as soon as you add a wildcard char, dir?/any always returns true dir?/any %ddddff.file == false ;; no wild ==> false dir?/any %ddd?dff.file == true ;; wild ==> true dir?/any %ddd*dff.file == true ;; wild ==> true dir?/any http://www.test.com/file.html == false ;; no wild ==> false dir?/any http://www.test.com/*.html == true ;; wild: true |
Henrik 16-Aug-2009 [16779x2] | looks like a bug |
definitely a bug. please add it to curecode, thanks. | |
BrianH 16-Aug-2009 [16781x2] | It's already there - add your code as a comment on the existing DIR? /any ticket. |
The ticket in question is #649. | |
Sunanda 17-Aug-2009 [16783] | Thanks -- had not seen that ticket. |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16784] | I proposed change of command! to external! extern! or something like that. We will see, if Carl reacts to that .... |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16785] | The word "command" is more specific, and better expresses what you are referring to. |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16786] | I have heard at least one other opinion, that name "command" might be too worthy to waste on simple and signle thing as wrapping merely a funciton call. Of course even Devices have commands, but those are not probably rebol level related and influence nothing ... |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16787x2] | You mentioned that "command" would need to be reserved for devices. There's no reason that devices couldn't use the existing command! type. It's very flexible. |
Carl said that devices would be a variant on extensions. | |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16789x2] | No, I said, that device commands probably don't influence rebol level code, so that we are eventually free to rename extension command to extension! term. That was just a thought, in case we would have some better usage for 'command term later. Nothing really important imo. Extension commands are not much advanced - they are just descriptor for particular meaning. |
When I think "command", I think - dialect ... | |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16791] | Sorry, I wrote that in relation to what you had said on the blog, not here. |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16792] | and to just describe meaning of wrapping a call, I though external!, extern!, ext!, wrap! could be used instead. Probably too late to try to convince anyone :-) |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16793] | Those are all modifier words. We need a noun. |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16794x2] | more interesting stuff on Chat :-) I expressed opinion, that we use assymetry for read and write with strings, Carl objected. His second post might be interesting for you, as he for few moments thought, where is the right place for such stuff. I think that you would enjoy putting your opinion there. Of course - my post was done just to provoke some discussion :-) |
btw - "external", english-wise, can't be thought as a noun? | |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16796] | I just read it, and was about to reply to your counter-post, just to one point. External is an adjective. When used as a noun, its subject is implied. Bad form. |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16797x2] | OK, just read your post, makes sense ... |
as for Chat - is there any shortcut to know, where I am posting by default? I mean - the only commands I use is "n" for new posts. The I want to add a reply. But adding a reply is different then simply posting "p". But - when adding a reply "r", I specify the message number, so I can be sure, where it goes. But where does simple "p" post it? | |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16799x2] | In your current location (look at the prompt). |
r posts in the same header as the original post, but the post can be moved later. | |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16801] | hardly to know (when using n, lm), what is your "original post" - is it the latest one? I simply have to go to particular message number, and then use 'p or 'r there .... I think that for 'lm, I would welcome message category/path being displayed on the first line .... |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16802x2] | I use nn to determine the latest posts, then read the posst I want to reply to, then reply. |
The "original post" you are replying to is displayed by n or nn with a > on the left of it. I usually enter the number for the post I want to reply to first, which displays in and sets the >. Then I use r. I wish there was an rp command... | |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16804] | So am I correct thinking, that when I use "p" after "n", then I am replying in the header of message marked with ">"? |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16805x2] | r to reply, not p, but yes. |
It you do p, you post in the header you are in (you can tell which that is from the prompt). | |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16807] | after "n", my prompt is: "pekr:>>" - so where actually I would post? :-) |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16808x2] | Yeah, that's an annoying bug :( |
It's why I always go somewhere on purpose, either by typing in the header number manually or reading a message on the subject. | |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16810] | Brain - what is holding you back now from integrating your module changes? :-) |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16811] | I've had a week of dealing with personal/family stuff. Some of us don't have blogs/twitter :-/ |
Pekr 18-Aug-2009 [16812] | no problem with personal stuff. I meant it other way - if you are waiting for some other Carl's fixes, or is it your turn? If it is your turn, it will come, week or two sooner or later, who cares, just take your time :-) |
BrianH 18-Aug-2009 [16813] | It's my turn - I only had one unexpected factor, and it doesn't depend on Carl's work. |
Pekr 20-Aug-2009 [16814] | Brian - as for #706 - how is rebol.r placed in system/options/home more secure than having it in current directory? |
Nicolas 20-Aug-2009 [16815] | Is this a bug? blk: [a: 23 b: 34] to-object blk ** error - invalid argument make object! blk == make object! [a: 23 b: 34] What's the difference between the make and to functions? |
BrianH 20-Aug-2009 [16816x2] | TO does conversion, MAKE does construction. |
As for bug#706, it's a file permissions thing. You can set the permissions of the directory that REBOL is installed in, so that only authorized users can write to it (generally, only the administrator). This means that %rebol.r can't be written by untrusted scripts. If you let %rebol.r be loaded from just any diirectory, regardless of who has permissions to write to the directory, then you have enabled %rebol.r to be used as a malware installer. | |
Pekr 20-Aug-2009 [16818x2] | well, any "system friendly" (=somewhere deep shitty path) placement is VERY uncomfort for me :-) |
I will have to think about it, but if you think about script's current dir = user has already right to place script there, why should placing user.r there be a security violation? Well, truth is, that most of the time I am local admin, so my knowledge is limited here ... | |
BrianH 20-Aug-2009 [16820] | The %rebol.r file is only meant to be used by the person who installs REBOL, for the purposes of adding custom stuff that is specific to a particular computer. Loading standard libraries will be handled by the module system instead. This is the same reason why we are planning to replace %user.r with a preferences file. |
Pekr 20-Aug-2009 [16821] | I will not use any system, where any of my files resides outside my current dir. I hate that, and imo this is fatal design error of last century :-) |
older newer | first last |