World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
PeterWood 29-Aug-2007 [4354x2] | Personally I feel that adding extra testers at this stage would probably be a mistake. This feeling is not based just on my own experience or the observation that those currently in the team keep asking for the space they need to get things done. It is also the advice on the seminal work on managing software product development - Fred Brooks's The Mythical Man-Month. |
Saying that I share everybodies frustration .....but as the saying goes "patience is a virtue". | |
Terry 29-Aug-2007 [4356] | Testing is one thing, developing is another. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Aug-2007 [4357] | I am curious if they fixed a bug that exposes source code that I never put in RAMBO because of the sensitivity of it. |
Henrik 29-Aug-2007 [4358] | never heard about that? |
[unknown: 5] 29-Aug-2007 [4359x2] | Yeah I only sent an email to Carl long ago |
has to do with ports | |
Henrik 29-Aug-2007 [4361] | well, R3 ports are completely different so that's probably rewritten. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Aug-2007 [4362] | Yeah that is what I'm hoping. |
Henrik 29-Aug-2007 [4363x2] | >> map [where:] [1 2 3 4 5 6] [take/part where 2] == [[1 2] [3 4] [5 6]] |
I'm beginning to like this MAP function :-) | |
Graham 29-Aug-2007 [4365] | hardly intuitive though |
Pekr 30-Aug-2007 [4366x5] | I don't like non-advancing set-word index ... |
The discussion was deeper. | |
foreach [where:] data [change where 1] | |
above is na infinite loop. Normal variables are applied to data block advancing, set-words non advancing. It allows for easier constructs on one hand, but ppl will have to be sure to understand the difference of set-words ... | |
I correct myself, now as Gabriele explained it .... | |
Henrik 30-Aug-2007 [4371x2] | Graham, it needs a little context. The set-word in the word block points to the current position in the series. The behaviour has also been introduced with FOREACH. Before, there was no other way to grab the series itself (only its values) at it's current index inside the loop block. |
you can freely use words with set-words in the block: >> b: [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] == [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >> foreach [pos: val] b [?? pos ?? val] pos: [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] val: 1 pos: [2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] val: 2 pos: [3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] val: 3 etc.. | |
Pekr 30-Aug-2007 [4373] | yes, that is usefull, especially if you want to change elements in original series .... |
Ingo 30-Aug-2007 [4374x2] | Hi Pekr, I'd love to get my hands on an R3 alpha ... and I maybe would even have the time to play with it, but at the moment I don't feel like I'd have the resources to do some serieous testing. So, on the plus side, you don't have to expect a flood of error reports from my part ;-) |
sorry I forgot to put an "a" into serieous ;-) | |
Graham 30-Aug-2007 [4376x2] | My guess is we won't see beta before Xmas. |
this is based purely on RTs ability to keep to previous schedules :) | |
Graham 31-Aug-2007 [4378] | Gab, do you think Rebol could support one of those online real time multi-player sites with chat like Yahoogames? Perhaps using LNS ? |
Will 2-Sep-2007 [4379] | maybe time for a status update on Carl blog? 8-) |
Henrik 2-Sep-2007 [4380] | Good news: Bugs are being fixed. Bad news: More bug reports in bugtracker. :-) |
Pekr 3-Sep-2007 [4381] | Today Carl stated that we are probably close to public beta release. What "close" does mean, noone but Carl knows, though :-) But please, expect, well, a beta version, hmm, maybe even alpha :-) |
Jerry 3-Sep-2007 [4382] | close?: func [ release-date [ date! ] ] [ ( release-date - now ) < 365 ] soon?: :close? |
Pekr 3-Sep-2007 [4383] | :-) |
[unknown: 10] 6-Sep-2007 [4384x2] | I did not read anything about "Threading" in R3.. Is there any news on that part.. or will R3 just do more flexible 'event handling? (as an alternative) |
Pekr.. I hope its a public Beta..but i do think is an improved closed alpha release... | |
Henrik 7-Sep-2007 [4386x2] | threading is there, but is not yet tested very much. |
or tasks, as it's called. | |
RobertS 7-Sep-2007 [4388] | tasks is the word architects seem to prefer to use these days -- glad that is the choice -- getting each of these little things right adds up ... I hope |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4389] | Do VID3 buttons appropriately resize themselves to contain their text? usually we have specify the size of the button now. |
Henrik 8-Sep-2007 [4390] | BUTTON doesn't. BTN does. |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4391] | Know why the difference? |
Henrik 8-Sep-2007 [4392] | has something to do with the resizing algorithm in the new layout scheme |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4393x2] | So, with 'btn I can have text ranging from 1 char to 100 chars? |
And it will resize appropriately? | |
Henrik 8-Sep-2007 [4395x2] | yes, but it still depends also on the size of the layout, I believe |
checked. it doesn't. | |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4397x2] | Hmm. |
Seems a simple requirement .. needed for localisation etc | |
Henrik 8-Sep-2007 [4399] | shouldn't be a problem |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4400] | to implement? |
Henrik 8-Sep-2007 [4401] | gabriele has a localization system that we might use |
Graham 8-Sep-2007 [4402] | localisation was just an example |
Gabriele 9-Sep-2007 [4403] | we're keeping the VID1 naming here, although we can change that. BUTTON in VID1 was fixed size while BTN was variable size. in many cases, you want all buttons with more or less the same size, so you use BUTTON; when you want them to adapt to the text size, you use BTN. |
older newer | first last |