World: r3wp

man you are talking to me about things i don't undersand ...

for me networking starts and stops with read htttp://www.mysite.org/mydocument.html 
...

if i need more i copy past from people more clever than me other 
jobs :P

http://www.softwaredeveloper.com/features/ghosts-in-machine-071207/

BAM ...

ldci pointed that link ...


What do "Livin La Vida Loca" by Ricky Martin, "Mambo No. 5" by Lou 
Bega and REBOL all have in common? They all peaked for about a month 
in 1999 and nobody has thought they were cool ever since.
... man that's hard ...

A two-pronged attack killed REBOL. First, the fact that the end user 
had to single-handedly install an interpreter and do a good amount 
of legwork to get it and the application in sync ensured that the 
language wasn't going to be adopted by the masses" - the person clearly 
does not know, what he is ranting about ...

It is like Larry Wall (Perl) complaining, that REBOL has way too 
much of punctuation, for his liking :-)

lol

[] maybe are a ponctuation in his mind .... too much brackets ho 
common less than lisp anyway ... LISP ...  Lot of Insipid and Stupid 
Parenthesis :P

hum .... but at least this points the perception people outside of 
rebol community have about rebol...

and you know once people decided that rebol is another meaningless 
toy that's hard to show them the contrary ... That's why i always 
thought big language are made famous by big projects ...

j'ai deja du mal a me maintennir a flot sur paris si je dois bouger 
sur lyon je vais devoir dormir sous un pont ...

i find this article about rebol really unfair  ...

even if I'm agree that the rebol concept could or should be pushed 
further and that it was spread over too much OSes without taking 
full capabilities of the 3  or 4 main ones  ... that's not a reason 
to say it's  useless ...

man this guy is not cool in this article not only rebol is scratched 
and at the limit on the whole page the best comments are made on 
rebol lol... java2K .... lol ... poor java2K ...

poor intercal ...

rebol is not a ghost language no no no ....  well anyway i prefere 
my rebol ghost in my machine than .NET :P

my-func: func arg1 sring! arg2 intger  print rejoin arg1 to-string 
arg2  


hum i'm not sure that the [  less version of rebol would be readable 
easyly ...

but then you are obligated to indent your code to make it work like 
in python ... i hate indentation :P i love 1 liners  is that  a bad 
thing ?

i don't understand the install issue with rebol like java and .NET 
runtime ... i don't see the problem  there  or the point ... maybe 
he refers on other os like linux but even being half an idiot you 
put rebol VM in /usr/bin and you dont need to set up your path environement 
...

well, maybe this whole topic should be moved to Advocacy group ...

lol ... ok so off topic ...

Checking in.

lots of off topic stuff here. you may need to scroll a bit back, 
perhaps to Geomol's post.

Far to many messages to read them all.  Was there any conclusion 
or summary?

Wow... this message group has way too many messages. Has anyone thought 
about spliting the discussion into smaller topics?

Someone mentioned that there was a discussion here (somewhere) that 
I should comment on.

Geomol found a way to crash R2 with a C stack dump through self modifying 
code. It does not occur in R3, but it could be considered a security 
hole in R2, so the question was whether it should be made public 
in RAMBO. Since this group is already public, that's too late. But 
what would the official stance on security holes in R3 be? Should 
they unconditionally go to curecode?

On R2 bug:  a C stack dump, or a C stack execution?  Of course, either 
way, is it a security bug if it is only possible via code?  It must 
be possible via "input to code"... like a buffer overrun.


On R3: well, we know that as of this point, it's not secure yet. 
 If the bug is fundamental, e.g. in a native function or datatype, 
it should be posted to CureCode.


Once we say "ok we think it's secure now" then we can post any other 
bugs.

Someone mentioned that there was a discussion here (somewhere) that 
I should comment on.

 <- any hint of what it was? I'm looking, but can't see anything concrete. 
 There is something earlier about the R3 project plan needing to be 
 wikified, but Pekr says you already know that.

Yes, thanks... the project plan will be converted this week, before 
the progress report is posted.

Then there is also a bit more talk about ports and why there still 
are no protocols. There is no conclusion, other than people are either 
busy or lazy.

I pointed Carl here because of Concurrency topic not being addressed 
in the whole R3 lifetime. Carl said about it a few words. But yes, 
you are right Henrik - I also reminded Carl to wikify the project 
plan. It might be done as a part of bringing us October Status update 
....

2.100.86: PARSE fixes and enhancements. Major rewrite of the main 
PARSE function. Watch for any new side effects.

http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0259.html

And what A86 can do.

henrik or the 3rd thing ... that's don't have a beggining of a clue 
on what and how to do protocols....

see for example i have lot  of "free' time that I could spend on 
that topic but then i'm not sure the result will feet your expectations 
and i absolutly don't know how to proceed

demo gui not working any more in the new R3-a86.exe !!!!!

that would be due to the new PARSE.

** Script error: make-text-style does not allow block! for its font-parent 
argument

** Where: parse fontize do do either load-gui catch either either 
applier do try demo
** Near: parse spec [
    some [
        spot:
        set name set-w...


This error message is kinda weird. What is the content of "where" 
section? "parse spec" can be found in text-fonts.r source ...

submitted to curecode.

Pekr, the Where part is stack backtrace to help you find where the 
make-text-style function failed. This is a very nice feature. :-)

shadwolf, I'm no good at protocols either, so the only way is to 
study for example how HTTP was done in R3.

it is confusing and absolutly nothing telling to the end user

Actually this is way, way better than the output that R2 gave, but 
I wouldn't mind if "Where" was renamed "Stack" or something.

I just run trace/back on, demo, trace/back 20 ... I can't understand 
the output, yet, but interesting :-) But really - Windows console 
just sucks and downgrading my REBOL experience by tens of percents 
in comparison to R2.

sorry for alignment, but here it is:

Parse input: |
Parse match: block!
Parse input: |

1: make-text-style : function! [font-name font-parent spec /local 
proto style nam
2: to-word : function! [value]
3: name : base:
--> to-word
    1: to : action! [type spec]
    2: word! : word!
    3: :value : base:
    --> to
    <-- to == base
    <-- to-word == base

    4: parent : [      font: [          color: black          size
     **: error : Script expect-arg
     **: error : Script expect-arg
     **: error : Script expect-arg
 1: trace/back
 2: 10
    --> trace

just read the output from left to right. it shows that PARSE called 
MAKE-TEXT-STYLE, that FONTIZE called PARSE, that DO called FONTIZE, 
etc.


R2 would only point to the source location of MAKE-TEXT-STYLE, and 
then you would just have to hope that the place was unique enough 
to find it with a text editor's search function. That would be hard 
if MAKE-TEXT-STYLE existed in 20 different places in the code, and 
so you would have to proceed with several minutes of probing. No 
need for that anymore.

Here, I can immediately tell the path to the problem.

Henrik - as for protocols, dunno who, but someone here said, that 
the http protocol is done in an old-school way, and that it deserves 
new aproach. I will gladly wait for BrianH to take over this area 
...

I didn't study the trace function yet, so no comment on that one.

it's possible that HTTP needs to be rewritten. there are also still 
bugs in it.