World: r3wp
[!REBOL3 GUI]
older newer | first last |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2894x2] | Thanks for the docs reminder. The explanation of DO is here: |
http://www.rebol.com/r3/docs/gui/reactors.html | |
Henrik 26-Aug-2010 [2896] | Actually there are several changes by Bolek and Cyphre, that I've not yet studied, but much of the work that was handled by LAYOUT before is now relegated to PANEL and GROUP, which is why we talk so much about them and not a central LAYOUT function. They call various subfunctions that specifically focus on creating faces and laying them out and resizing them. So the styles themselves are capable of custom layouts and resizing mechanisms and also mechanisms such as face init and triggers. So that means you are no longer a "slave" of the LAYOUT function. That's also why: 1. I was talking a while ago about that you can build a style that emulates VID, complete with a dialect, or replace the layout mechanism with your own, by rewriting PANEL or GROUP or adding new panel styles. 2. That whenever you want to do a new thing, you should make it as a style. That's where you start. |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2897] | BrianH: stop claiming we don't refer to R3 GUI as VID, please? Where did you find out such a claim? It was VID 3 (Gab's version), and Carl's version was marked as VID 3.4 by Carl himself imo. There is NO point to stop calling it a VID, unless we find another marketing name, just because the architecture changed ... |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2898x2] | so we can take vid code and run it ? |
in a panel ? | |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2900] | Yeah. And then we decided to stop calling it VID because of the confusion. There was even a blog where a new name was requested, but it never came to a consensus. So we ended up calling it the R# GUI by default. The only one who still calls it VID is Pekr. |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2901] | Graham: Who do you ask, Henrik? :-) |
Henrik 26-Aug-2010 [2902] | graham, if you want, you can do something like this: view [vid [...regular vid dialect...]] If you write a style called VID and implement the dialect in it. |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2903] | (That was to Perk) |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2904] | (length? 'VID) < length? 'R3GUI |
Henrik 26-Aug-2010 [2905] | there's no limit to the size and complexity of a style, if that's what you mean. |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2906] | (length? "rock") < (length? "marshmallow") What's your point? There are docs and tutorials for VID out there. They don't in any way apply to the R3 GUI. |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2907x2] | no, typing :) |
2 more letters ... | |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2909] | There is no confusion, sooner or later we do reach the matrix's "there is no spoon" = there is no R2 - old, forgotten, boring. Do you call Delphi 6 not a Delphi, because you can't run the code in Delphi 2 anymore? Does Perl 6 rename, even if different to the old generation? VID is a good name. Simply put version 3.x is not compatible with version 2.x, easy as that ... I can't see any confusion, if we talk about VID in R3 related channels ... |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2910] | Yes has one more letter than No. They don't mean the same thing. |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2911] | (maybe the VID name selection should have been finished :-), if we would e.g. chose VIVID (vastly improve VID), there would be no confusion nowadays :-) |
Rebolek 26-Aug-2010 [2912] | I call it R3GUI to not confuse it with old VID, but I don't know if it's final name (not that I care right now). |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2913] | I liked VIVID too. The most important thing is to not call it VID though. |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2914x2] | R3GUI is surely not a final name, althought not that bad. It reads as REGUI, which is close to RebGUI :-) It will not work, once R4 is introduced (in 2020 or so :-) |
vivid.com si a porn-site though, so I think that VIVID is 1) not useable due to the factor mentioned 2) maybe too general name to google for? maybe vivid-gui.com would work though, dunno ... let's not opent the topic right now, there was something like 40 or more names suggested :-) | |
Ammon 26-Aug-2010 [2916] | I agree with calling it R3GUI until it is publicly available but I will not be suprised if we end up calling it VID again in the end... |
Pekr 26-Aug-2010 [2917] | In R3 channels, I expect vid referring to VID3 ... and why not distinguis it via VID2, VID3 then? Easy, and much easier to type than R3GUI ... |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2918x2] | Vivid is a standard english word, so it will not be as easy to search for on the internet. |
Too bad, it sounds cool. | |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2920] | VID VID2 VID3.4 and back to VID3 |
Henrik 26-Aug-2010 [2921] | (finally a topic that everyone can contribute to :-)) |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2922x3] | I always preferred GOD for graphic object dialect |
but curiously no one else liked it | |
Nice and sweet | |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2925] | A search for GOD may take a lifetime to find any useful answers :) |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2926] | well clearly REBOL would be in the same search because of word overloading |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2927] | How would a search for REBOL GOD not turn up references to Carl, Gabriele or Ladislav? :) |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2928] | http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Glossary Face A REBOL object serving as a VID element. A higher level than the gob! datatype. |
Gabriele 26-Aug-2010 [2929] | hmm... would that imply that I don't exist? |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2930] | Graham, that wiki includes R2 docs too. And is outdated - the VID references should be excised, or qualified. |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2931] | Gabriele .. if enough people believe in you, you will exist! |
BrianH 26-Aug-2010 [2932] | Gabriele, thanks for that "dying for our sins" thing. That was a classy thing to do :) |
Graham 26-Aug-2010 [2933x3] | You'll be more than a tea port in a planetary orbit |
pot | |
Ahh... Gabriele has gone .. in a puff of celestial smoke! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot | |
Anton 26-Aug-2010 [2936x2] | Oh oh, I'm not sure I like how this discussion is evolving. |
(Ooops, I shouldn't have said that...) | |
Steeve 26-Aug-2010 [2938] | Today, I made some tests (again) with vectorial fonts using draw. And... It's not that bad when the gamma correction is... corrected. My test: font: ["verdana" size: 15] gamma 2.0 pen none http://sites.google.com/site/rebolish/test-1/not_bad.png (look at the white text) |
AdrianS 28-Aug-2010 [2939] | Can anyone say what the criteria was for how functions were split under draw and shape? Seems that the shape ones could just as well be under draw. |
shadwolf 28-Aug-2010 [2940] | steeve is doing an irc mini client like ... the font is well designed but a gamma correction 2.0 isn't it a bit too clear ? why 2.0 and not 20.0 ? seems something completly arbitrary again a speudo hack to solve a lack of real work ... |
shadwolf 29-Aug-2010 [2941x2] | so in conclusion another week without any real progress ... |
CAn we have a better calling for R3 hostkit package ... since it's supposed to haven't change on API level can't we distinguish the number for the hostkit api version and a number for the GUI related engine ? something like r3-hostkit-102-GUI-still-the-same.zip ? | |
Graham 29-Aug-2010 [2943] | BTW, the gvoice2 script http://rebol.wik.is/GoogleVoicecould just as easily be written in R3GUI ... if it were available |
older newer | first last |