World: r3wp

Can you show how?

blah: closure [a b c d] [a: 1 b: "xyzdddddddd" c: 3 d: a * c]
benchmark [apply :blah []]

HTML of new R3 doc pages has similar problems on most pages due to 
no urlencode of ampersand in urls and invald <th> declarations using 
old <tr> attrib values for vertical-align in a <th> element.  I would 
gladly fix ad hoc and you can fix your page gen tools (?) later

test: 42 ;  test:none  ;  comment { test remains 42 but no error 
unlike, say, simple undefined  testnone   That missing space looks 
nasty when test:none should have been    test: none           Is 
this a bug in R3?    test:none does not return none but instead returns 
  test:none

>> test: 42
== 42
>> test:none
== test:none
>> testnone
** Script error: testnone has no value

that's a bug:
>> test:none: 1
== 1

>> test:none
== test:none

And it's bug in R2 as well.

I don't think it is a bug, test:none: is a url.
>> test:none: print "x"
== x

if it would a set-word then it should give an error like "test:none 
needs a value"
x: print "a"; == x needs a value
>> ? test:none:
== test:none: is an url

probably you are right.. maybe it's for cases like>  mailto:[carl-:-rebol-:-xxx] 
 <not very useful imho :)

a tolerated bug in R2 becomes a revered feature in R3, no?   If that 
is not a bug, then I may be the pope.  Or is it "the caprice of the 
colon", otherwise known as 'the big C" ?  You must excuse me, Jon 
Stwarrt just explained that science is faith and I am still in awe.

Single colon urls, can use it for:

Machine tags - one:two=three
For taguris - tag:example.com,2006:Fluffy 
Database - db:movies
Placeholders - go:here

And mailto: ... which can have it's merits, eg. - mt: find "mailto:" 
load/next mt (not for spam)


All of which you can write mini port handlers for, should you have 
the need...

RobertS, it's not a bug even in R2.

has find/all been discussed in relation to R3?  I think its a huge 
gap in REBOL.   maybe there's another function for this, but I'd 
rather have it "close to the source".

R3 A102 released internally. (Have no other info yet)

http://www.rebol.com/r3/changes.html

http://www.rebol.com/r3/downloads/r3-host-kit-a102.zip

No support for structures yet?

No conversion functions yet, if that is what you mean. No struct! 
type as well, but that was a given. You can pass pointers to structures 
around as the handle! type, structure data in the binary! type, and 
convert using extension functions, or even REBOL code for binary! 
data.

If you want a great set of conversion functions start writing them, 
and get others involved for the advice and help. You might consider 
starting with the conversion blog here: http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/r3blog.r?view=0317#comments

If conversion functions aren't done by the time I finish the module 
system revamp, and I have the time, I'll try implementing the model 
suggested in the comments of that blog. Not the struct! type though, 
that would be terrible for conversions.

A quick poll .. who is actually working on end user projects using 
R3 now??

Or, if that is too much to expect .. who is actually using R3 for 
anything??

And if you're not .. what is the thing that is blocking you the most 
from using R3 ?

GUI, console (not willing to experiment that much with the Windows 
default one), call, protocols (ftp, email, easy-cgi), DB (mysql, 
sqlite)

Well, of those, I think I only see 'call and 'gui as blocking ... 
as the others are either usable in some sort of fashion

we have suffix? ... so why not root? ( or whatever? )

root?: func [ f  ][
    copy/part f (length? f) - length? suffix? f
]

The big biggest block to me using R3 is CureCode Bug #1361.

incomplete error trapping?

Yes. It is blocking on two levels; first repeatable tests abort, 
secondly live applications cannot be fully protected.

We are going to do our next commercial project with R3. I bite the 
bullet and wie will create everything we need on the fly.

GUI: This will result in a bunch of styles we need.

DB: Either we use SQLApi+ or OpenDBX to get access to a bunch of 
databases through the same interface.

Did you create a sqlite3 binding for R3 ?

Yes, I need to review it but overall it works.

We will publish this extension as soon as we have used it in a real 
life (internal) app to be sure it works.

Not using R3 for anything.

Reason: lack of energy. Illness took me down to about 1% of my programming 
capacity since about a year ago. Just starting to increase again 
recently.

robert, great to hear about the gui. what kind of styles you are 
planning?
some advanced ones like treeview etc.?

for now, whatever is needed for the application that is going to 
be built.

a textfield? ;-)

Do you know when is planed the unicode support in gui's textfields?

Or is it already there?

unicode will be fixed along with other DRAW bugs, when the host kit 
is done.

Peter, agreed, there are a bunch of related TRY and unwind bugs that 
need fixing. It's not blocking me as much as the PROTECT bugs, but 
it's there.

Anton, that explains a lot, sorry to hear about the illness. Glad 
you are recovering :)

Is it just me ... or is the official information about R3 undergoing 
further fragmentation?

We've got some prelim docs here on the host kit http://www.rebol.com/r3/docs/concepts/host-kit.html

but then we now see documentation in the change logs here  http://www.rebol.com/r3/changes.html
as well as here http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/r3blog.r?view=0324

http://www.rebol.com/docs/reference.html

missing 'funct  :)   Guess RebotTutorial got to Carl!

Fork mentioned FUNC vs. FUNCT naming issues.


As far as I am concerned, I am quite content with FUNC instead of 
LAMBDA as other languages using this construct "promote". Regarding 
the FUNCT name - as far as I remember, the FUNCTOR alternative was 
considered, but it looked impractically long for a common usage.

lambda/functor

 are better choices than "func/funct" because they aren't totally 
 made up.  But while they are not "warty" they are still "scary". 
  And most of Rebol is not that scary...with a few standouts (the 
 "re-" functions like rejoin and repend, and the /only refinement)

for you lambda is not "totally made up"? for me it is, it does not 
have any sense except in a narrow community

REPEND can be finessed in code which new users are going to be exposed 
to by just saying APPEND X REDUCE Y.  It would be nice if JOIN could 
do this as well.