World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Henrik 20-Oct-2009 [19122] | That could perhaps be useful. Generally there has been some level of index concurrency control with multiple series missing in R2, like being able to do a FORALL on multiple series simultaneously. I can't remember if R3 solves any of that, because it's been discussed quite a long time ago. |
BrianH 20-Oct-2009 [19123] | This is difficlt to do efficiently. |
Henrik 20-Oct-2009 [19124] | I know. I just want less plumbing :-) |
BrianH 20-Oct-2009 [19125] | FIND/all and FIND/first could save tons of time - exponential time. |
Pekr 20-Oct-2009 [19126] | So let's be sure to push on Carl in that regard, to get those two implemented. I am not sure Carl will implement stuff by the project plan. |
Henrik 20-Oct-2009 [19127] | so, FORALL is native in R3. that might make it harder to change. Otherwise I would suggest, since it uses a word for input series to use a block for multiple series: forall [series1 series2 series3] [print [index? series1 index? series2 index? series3]] 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 ... |
BrianH 20-Oct-2009 [19128] | The cases where you have to work on many series of all the same length are rare. |
Henrik 20-Oct-2009 [19129] | I run into this curiously often, which is why I suggested it. It's useful where you need to get a block of blocks "turned 90 degrees". |
BrianH 20-Oct-2009 [19130] | The DB people call that column storage :) |
Robert 20-Oct-2009 [19131] | Yes, and you often have to switch between row & column pocessing. |
Henrik 22-Oct-2009 [19132] | A91 released with some UTF-16 support |
Pekr 22-Oct-2009 [19133] | A92 you mean :-) |
Henrik 22-Oct-2009 [19134] | I'm tired :-) Went too late to bed. |
Graham 22-Oct-2009 [19135x2] | Went to bed too late :) |
That's part of the Rebol life ... | |
Henrik 22-Oct-2009 [19137x2] | Reading the bitsets document, says: Create a bitset large enough to holds bits up to 1000 and set bit 1000: bits: make bitset! 1000 ; note that bit 1000 is set But in A92: >> make bitset! 1000 == make bitset! #{ 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 } Is this right? |
added as bug#1290 | |
Chris 22-Oct-2009 [19139x3] | Another shot at reworking my XML loader for R3: http://bit.ly/xml_rebol - works mostly, try: rss: load-xml/dom http://www.rebol.com/article/carl-rss.xml entries: rss/get-by-tag <item> foreach entry entries [probe entry/get <title>] However trips at the first line of the first example: html: load-xml/dom http://w3.org as follows: >> do http://www.ross-gill.com/r/r3xml.r Script: "XML for REBOL 3" Version: 0.2.0 Date: 22-Oct-2009 >> html: load-xml/dom http://w3.org ** Access error: protocol error: "Redirect to other host - requires custom handling" >> html: load-xml/dom http://www.w3.org Segmentation fault On 2.100.90.2.5 |
Appears to be OK on 2.100.92.3.1 | |
Boiled it down to: parse "^(A000)" [remove #" "] | |
Maxim 22-Oct-2009 [19142] | Added an idea on the bitset complement dilema, worth considering IMHO. its a logical extension of the new bitset notation |
Chris 22-Oct-2009 [19143] | Is 'load/next supposed to return binary as the second part of the result? |
Pekr 23-Oct-2009 [19144] | Max - what you are proposing - could it serve to support collation mechanism? Because what we still lack is to support specific collation sorting - unless it is implemented, I refuse to claim, that R3 supports Unicode ... |
Maxim 23-Oct-2009 [19145x3] | ah... well, I was just proposing a way to prevent bitsets scaling to2^16 bits when you join them in specific ways. |
created ticket #1292, addresses a few problems date! handling of time. | |
if you look at the ticket, what I asked for really is usefull and shouldn't be very hard for Carl to address. | |
Henrik 23-Oct-2009 [19148x2] | Those should probably be split in 3 reports. |
I'll let you do that, since you wrote the original report. :-) | |
Maxim 23-Oct-2009 [19150x4] | ok then.... |
actually... doing more tests.... I realize that the time is added to the date directly, not counting current time... which is actually proper, since I'm doing a set... not an addition. | |
so I'll change that bug report to a documentation one... cause it can be misleading until one understands it. | |
done... | |
Pekr 23-Oct-2009 [19154] | hmm, a bit too many crashes, recently, no? :-) Are unit testings still being done for releases? |
Henrik 23-Oct-2009 [19155] | http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0280.html Delayed init of built in modules. |
Pekr 25-Oct-2009 [19156] | Per Twitter message, Carl seems to be working on interesting topic - Improving standard I/O to allow R3 to be used with redirections, CGI and other purposes. |
Gabriele 25-Oct-2009 [19157] | this could be interesting to those building a "Try rebol" web page: http://www.masswerk.at/jsuix/ |
BrianH 26-Oct-2009 [19158] | Chris: "Is 'load/next supposed to return binary as the second part of the result?" Yes. R3 source is defined as binary encoded in UTF-8, not as a string. LOAD/next of a dir or url which returns a block on read, or of a script-in-a-block will return a block reference as the next though. |
Pekr 26-Oct-2009 [19159] | Stdio fixes and improvements - http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0281.html |
Carl 26-Oct-2009 [19160] | Last week, Pekr asked if I would stop by. |
Steeve 26-Oct-2009 [19161] | Hi master ! |
Carl 26-Oct-2009 [19162x4] | Hi Steeve. Quick response! |
Unfortunately, I don't have time to read back over the older messages (and there are many), but... I have an idea: | |
We could do a Q&A type session. It would be live. We could use a new group if desired. Perhaps put the date in the name. | |
It's not my intention to be difficult to reach.... but I do tend to get very focused when I'm working on specific things. | |
Steeve 26-Oct-2009 [19166] | Sure, we just need that others here, wake up |
Carl 26-Oct-2009 [19167] | We can adjust the timing for that... to some degree. |
Pekr 26-Oct-2009 [19168] | Carl - we wanted to address priorities |
Steeve 26-Oct-2009 [19169x2] | One question about the further compressed inlined modules. what sort of compression format do you intend to tuse ? |
oups, sorry | |
Pekr 26-Oct-2009 [19171] | there is !REBOL3 Priorities group here ... but - as far as my understanding goes, you might not agree to requests ... |
older newer | first last |