World: r3wp

Question for Carl - after 2.7.8.  - are we finally back to R3? :-)

EXTRACT fix posted for R3 (and R2 as well). Good catch, Sunanda :)

The R3 version is a lot faster because of the native loops :)

Brian, I don't agree that a half-keyword SELF is the simplest way 
to solve the problem.

That's true. The simplest way to solve the problem would be to not 
have 'self at all, even for objects. Simplest isn't always best.

But if you are comparing to having separate object! and context! 
types, that would move all of the inherent complexity of the situation 
out into the mezzanine code, where dealing with complexity is the 
most expensive. And object! would still need all of the current 'self 
tricks to make it safe to use, so there's no real gain. At least 
with R3's solution the inherent complexity of the situation is encapsulated 
and dealt with.

Finally, the only reason we still need 'self is because you can't 
use path notation with the results of a function (BIND? in this case). 
So you have to have the result assigned to a word to be easily able 
to do the tricks one can do with path notation. Thus the only reason 
we need 'self is for convenience, so that the end developer doesn't 
have to constantly reinvent their own 'self references, badly.

When I say "badly", we come to the only thing you can't do with a 
roll-your-own 'self: The UNPROTECT exception. UNPROTECT won't unprotect 
'self: it refuses to. And it will unprotect any other protected word 
(future security restrictions allowing). So the one thing you can't 
fake is a persistent word reference to the object that you can't 
modify (the way you can in R2). At least not without writing your 
own UNPROTECT.

Admittedly, you can't do the BIND unhiding trick either, but if you 
roll your own (let's call it 'this), the 'this reference can go in 
another context and you will get the same advantages. Or you can 
bind all the code that needs to refer to 'this before you hide 'this, 
so you won't need to unhide 'this later (normally impossible).

Now keep in mind that the stuff that is done to hide 'self and prevent 
its modification will be there regardless of whether we have 'self: 
It's just ordinary PROTECT and PROTECT/hide. So getting rid of 'self 
doesn't get rid of the code used to implement it.

Brian... after more than 10 years of writing REBOL programs... I 
can't imagine how what you're talking about is useful in any way. 
I guess YMMV.

I wrote bug #1549 to describe what is the problem I am having with 
'self handling in R3

irreparable bugs

 isn't descriptive enough. Please add a comment explaining what the 
 bugs in question are, and why you think they are "irreparable", when 
 you link tickets that have known methods that can be used to solve 
 them, including one that is already fixed. And why DO-IN, a function 
 that only exists in the example code of the ticket, not in R3, matters. 
 If you don't do this *in the ticket or its comments* then the ticket 
 will need to be dismissed.

I mean, I can guess based on the discussion here, but I won't be 
the one deciding that ticket. And the one who will wasn't involved 
in this discussion and wouldn't have any idea what you are talking 
about.

#1552 added

Added more detail to the description of #1552.

After Beijing Olympics, China government blocks more and more web 
sites. Google Blogspot is one of them. Since most of Chinese people 
cannot visit my REBOL blog on Blogspot, so I decided to create a 
new REBOL blog in Sina.com.cn, which is China-local. The new blog 
will be dedicated to (1) People in China (2) Programming Beginners 
(3) Students in High-schools. It's been created for 4 days. 8 Lessons 
have been published. Check it out here http://blog.sina.com.cn/yingerpeifang
 BTW, "YingErPeiFang" means "Baby Formula".

Also, I think R3 Beta is on its way. It's time for me to talk about 
REBOL in China.

Cool!

How about a while-either function

while either [do this condition while true][do this condition while 
false] none would exit out of the loop

Just those three values? How would you like it to react to conditions 
that are other values than logic! or none?

Paul, can you give some actual scenarios you want it for?

If a block evaluates to anything other than that then it is true.

Can't think of anything actual Gregg that I'm working on but when 
stuff like that exists people tend to come up with scenarios after 
awhile.

When is the next R3 alpha being rolled out ?

Graham, it's been a long journey.

Carl, how is the next host/extension (with view as a plugin) comming 
along?

we need status update blog ;-)

and a lot of spam cleared from the blog

just another non-action by RT ... I already reported spam. IIRC, 
Graham also said, he did so ... but it was never removed,hence it 
means Carl is ignoring those emails ...

... so the only info we have got after a month or more of total lack 
of any info, is, that "it's been a long journey"? Great. This really 
starts to look rudiculous ....

This has been the pattern with Rebol development in the few years 
that I have been Rebolling. Whether it looks ridicuous or not is 
a matter of personal opinion, but surely it is to be expected?

If we don't lobby for change, nothing will change ...

Spam cleared from blog. The abuse mechanism works again. Thanks for 
reporting it, and sorry about the build-up of spams.


I must admit that the blog.r code has become more complicated over 
the years due to issues like spam, but it's not going to be revised 
again until it gets moved into R3.

Delegate

Let me know if you figure out how.

Submited 16 more spam postings

User with high enough rating logs in and sees additional option to 
remove postings ....

Ah, ok... good answer.

I'm not seeing your new report. Did it indicate an error?

R3 blog swept now too.

BTW, there were various xratio comments marked as abuse, but did 
not look like abuse. Why? (Contact me privately if necessary.)

His anti-muslim rantings

Those were removed and the disclaimer at the bottom of the page was 
updated.

No, no errors on submission.

Which blog?

R3 but looks like you're now removed them

Yes, ok, both blogs now.

OT, what about a 64 bit R2?