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

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

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 :-)
BrianH
20-Aug-2009
[16822]
Then put REBOL in your current directory too.
Pekr
20-Aug-2009
[16823x2]
I hope R3 does not need to be installed at all. I use flash disk 
all the time - Total commander, XnView, Miranda - no installation. 
I can tell you - sometimes in the future, there will not be any installation 
process at all :-)
yes, REBOL in my current directory ...
BrianH
20-Aug-2009
[16825x3]
No install needed. The whole %rebol.r concept is meant for use by 
sysadmins who want to control what programs can be run on their system 
- there is even a Windows Policy that lets you limit which directories 
programs can run from. Regular users would never use %rebol.r at 
all.
In general, if I were a sysadmin, I would not load any functions 
in %rebol.r - I would just put a call to SECURE in there, to limit 
access to my resources. This would help me lock down my user's scripts. 
I wouldn't use %rebol.r at all for user's personal computers, just 
for public-use computers.
bbl
Maxim
20-Aug-2009
[16828x2]
%rebol.r is very usefull when it works under R2 (which it doesn't 
most of the time).  you can put a few generalized functions you always 
want access to... setting lib pats, protecting/securing them, loading 
some libs by default, etc.
where is the %rebol.r file supposed to be in R3... In the same dir 
as %rebol.exe... no?
BrianH
20-Aug-2009
[16830x2]
In the same directory as rebol.exe, yes.
Under R3 the generalized functions would be in modules - it makes 
scripts more predictable.
Maxim
20-Aug-2009
[16832]
well, I've been doing that for years with slim  ;-)
BrianH
20-Aug-2009
[16833]
Inspiration!
Maxim
20-Aug-2009
[16834x2]
so, it wasn't all for naught !  cool    ;-)
btw the extensions really are a god send... its cool you wrapped 
them into modules.  good work.
BrianH
20-Aug-2009
[16836x2]
Even more so soon - I've been busy.
I just discovered more reasons why you need to be careful with %rebol.r: 
It's more powerful than I thought. The %rebol.r script runs in the 
system context before the user context is created, and before the 
system object is protected. It's almost like having your own host 
code.
Maxim
20-Aug-2009
[16838]
that is what I would expect it to do.  this way I can really use 
protect before any real code is run, and I can safely manipulate 
the global context... possibly having custom monitored versions of 
some low-level stuff like networking and I/O... so I could see what 
is going on, and even install safeguards against some external resources.
Nicolas
21-Aug-2009
[16839x2]
Does anyone know of any way to detect alt-down and alt-up events?
or a way to detect whether capslock is down or up?
ChristianE
21-Aug-2009
[16841x2]
If by alt-up/alt-down you mean alt-key modified up-key/down-key in 
opposite to plain up-key/down-key, with current R2 that's not possible 
to detect, afaik since not all OSes R2 has been designed for feature 
such a system specific key. Detecting caps lock isn't supported, 
too.
I'm sorry, wrong group, that's R3 here, so the above simply doesn't 
apply.
BrianH
21-Aug-2009
[16843]
Time for you to chime in, Henrik :)
Henrik
21-Aug-2009
[16844x3]
Hmm... let's see. :-)
I don't think caps lock is possible to capture right now.
Regarding alt-up and alt-down, you just check for them in the ON-CLICK 
actor:

	on-click: [ ; arg: event
		if arg/type = 'alt-down [foo]