World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
kib2 15-Jan-2009 [9604] | This is really cruel...waiting for something that may never come! |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9605x4] | If you die tonight ... well, everything will never come. |
don't sweat over things you have no control over! | |
So, is Carl going to prevent developments that will eventually render this type of chat unusable in a console? | |
like attachments, formatted code, or color syntax coding etc | |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9609] | That's an interesting question. Perhaps you should ask that in RebDev. :-) |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9610] | Just wondering how this will all scale over different devices and media |
kib2 15-Jan-2009 [9611] | bad joke, but R3 it's like Perl 6 for me. |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9612] | I don't want to be a negative influence :) |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9613] | Graham, I think that if the message format is going to get more complex, there would still be ways to parse it for console use. |
Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [9614x2] | kib2: why? Perl 6 is in development two times the R3. And one year ago there was a public alpha. Soon enough there will be another one. This time with final GUI architecture (although not complete yet) |
Henrik - is rebdev usable from R2? It has much better console. Windows one sucks, I can't set it wider easily ... | |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9616x2] | kib2, I know, but as I can see now, making a programming language is no picnic. This is the first time I've witnessed it close up. There is still a long way to go. |
pekr, no, r2 console version is low priority. Carl wants to do R3 GUI version next. | |
Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [9618] | good to know GUI is next. It will help to further improve GUI ... |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9619] | html version should be next ... |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9620] | Graham, that would delay the GUI. |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9621] | ok, concurrent then :) |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9622x2] | The only way to truly speed up development would be to clone Carl. |
So Carl1 could focus on rebdev, Carl2 could focus on tasks and Carl3 could focus on modules. Carl4 would work on the GUI and ReBrowser. | |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9624x2] | just give us more docs and we can do this |
that's really the point of collaboration | |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9626] | But can we provide stuff of high enough quality for him? That's the issue. |
kib2 15-Jan-2009 [9627] | Pekr: I wasn't aware of the GUI stuff. |
Graham 15-Jan-2009 [9628] | if that's an issue .. then he should close off all collaboration. |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9629] | It is _the_ issue. Carl trusts no one unless you can work at his level. And that is also why the quality of R3 alpha feels like everyone elses release versions. :-) |
PeterWood 15-Jan-2009 [9630] | Where should I report DevBase bugs? |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9631] | I suppose the best place for now is CureCode. |
Steeve 15-Jan-2009 [9632] | When we use to block! on input data, most of the time we don't want duplicate them if data are already a block. (we use copy instead if we really want that behavior) i think to block!, to string! , form and some other native conversions should never duplicate the data if they already have the correct format. This, should limit the memory overhead in many scripts or mezzanines, and save us from coding many useless tests. |
[unknown: 5] 15-Jan-2009 [9633] | I agree Steeve. |
Steeve 15-Jan-2009 [9634] | it appears to me that most of mezzanines who have to do such conversions could be 1) shorter and faster 2) with less memory overhead |
[unknown: 5] 15-Jan-2009 [9635] | I agree with you and it seems to me that it would be a wise fix. |
Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [9636] | to block! copies data? if so - why? :-) |
Steeve 15-Jan-2009 [9637x2] | actually it copy them, don't know why... |
>> z: [1] == [1] >> same? Z to block! z == false | |
Pekr 15-Jan-2009 [9639] | this would go against REBOL principles - copy only if needed. There was some change in regards to functions in relation to bind or something like that, but ... |
[unknown: 5] 15-Jan-2009 [9640] | Maybe this question has more to do with when to use to-block verses modifying it. |
Steeve 15-Jan-2009 [9641] | as Pekr stated, if we want a copy, we use copy |
sqlab 15-Jan-2009 [9642] | If I want my data to be the same, I do not apply an operation on them.) |
Steeve 15-Jan-2009 [9643x3] | You don't see the point... |
to block! is vastely used to permit polymorphic input in functions. | |
even like form... | |
Henrik 15-Jan-2009 [9646] | Graham, it seems the file commands are saved for elsewhere in rebdev, so he won't use them here. |
BrianH 15-Jan-2009 [9647x3] | PeterWood, report DevBase bugs in the !DevBase group here. There is no CureCode area for DevBase. Keep in mind: - The current DevBase will be replaced soon. RebDev is a code name for the next DevBase. - DevBase may be more updated than you think. Ask more in the !DevBase group. |
Steeve, to-block is used in a lot of code to *copy* and/or convert to blocks. We depend on the copying behavior a lot. | |
Particularly in the mezzanines :) | |
[unknown: 5] 15-Jan-2009 [9650] | I think he is saying that if the value is already a block why copy it. |
BrianH 15-Jan-2009 [9651] | I would love a separate function called AS-BLOCK that does convert if necessary else pass on. Maybe an AS native with a ton of wrappers, just like TO. That would solve the problem without losing the existing behavior. |
[unknown: 5] 15-Jan-2009 [9652x2] | now your talking.... |
BrianH, keep Steeve in mind if you get openings for more programmers in developement of R3. | |
older newer | first last |