World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
Sunanda 14-Oct-2010 [5305] | Does R3 somewhere have the equivalent of READ/CUSTOM .... [POST...] yet? I'd like to read a URL as a POST rather than a GET. |
GrahamC 14-Oct-2010 [5306] | Yes it does |
Henrik 15-Oct-2010 [5307] | looks like Carl will not only be attending Amiwest, but exhibiting as well. |
Sunanda 15-Oct-2010 [5308] | Thanks Graham....Now, can I have a clue what the equivalent is!? |
Pekr 15-Oct-2010 [5309] | Henrik - what is he going to exhibit? R3 on Amiga? Or R3 in general? |
Henrik 15-Oct-2010 [5310] | Don't know. He is just listed as an exhibitor. Maybe he'll bring wine. :-) |
Maxim 15-Oct-2010 [5311] | I think he'll try to peddle is "rare" Amiga items... ;-) |
GrahamC 15-Oct-2010 [5312] | result: write http://yourhost.com/cgi-bin/myscript.cgi{Posted data} See http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Scheme:_HTTP |
Sunanda 15-Oct-2010 [5313] | Thanks Graham. Initially, that sounds lllogical -- doing a write to read a URL. But I guess it makes sense -- as POST is supposed to cause an update action of some sort at the server end. |
GrahamC 15-Oct-2010 [5314x2] | I'm not sure of the logic .. I would think that 'write should be used for non idempotent actions but that's not how it is done. |
Anyway, 'read is a straight 'GET and write allows custom headers | |
Kaj 15-Oct-2010 [5316] | I always thought HTTP GET is incredibly anti-intuitive when used to send form data. Mapping write to POST feels a lot more logical |
GrahamC 15-Oct-2010 [5317x3] | I haven't looked to see how it handles PUT, and DELETE with parameters |
now whether PUT can stream a file off the filesystem | |
now => nor | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5320] | That was a heck of a coding and debugging session we just got through. Alpha 108 is going to be really cool :) |
Maxim 19-Oct-2010 [5321] | have a lot of things changed wrt the host-kit structure and its files? |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5322] | I don't know about that yet, I just worked on core builds. Afaik there are no major changes to the host kit APIs in this release. Only major system structure and semantic changes in R3 itself. And a new module system with all sorts of fun tricks available. And some fun minor changes to some natives and mezzanines, plus some major changes to a few other mezzanines. |
Maxim 19-Oct-2010 [5323] | I really would like to have some feedback from Carl about the Host-lib suggestions I did in R3 chat. |
PeterWood 19-Oct-2010 [5324] | What are the registered filetypes in the more recent builds? What is the consequence of a file type being registered? Is there any documentation? |
Maxim 19-Oct-2010 [5325] | I don't think the A108 R3 installs yet. |
Oldes 19-Oct-2010 [5326] | I use .r3 for REBOL3 scripts and .r for R2. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5327] | Let's hope we get an A108 hostkit at all ... |
Ladislav 19-Oct-2010 [5328] | I think, that the majority of REBOL scripts are .r and they work in both R2 as well as in R3 |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5329] | If someone close to Carl could ask him to release A108 as both binary and hostkit, that would be much appreciated. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5330x3] | That is the plan, Andreas. |
But we are doing a core release first, to let people hammer on it to make sure the system changes work. Then we will likely release a host kit, or one for the a109 release. | |
(drumroll...) | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5333] | OK, so it's not the plan, just a binary release. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5334] | ...first. Your concerns (and those of others) have been noted and passed along. But the plan will be set based on the stability of the core release. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5335] | What good reason is there for not doing hostkit releases side-by-side with the binary releases? |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5336] | When the release focusses on host kit changes, that makes sense. This release completely revamps the R3 internal structure. It might not work at all, let alone work in a host kit. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5337x2] | Which is a pity. |
Namely, that Carl still seems to use tons of different codebases for the different releases. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5339x2] | Why is it a pity that we would want to isolate testing to that which changed? |
For experimental releases especially. | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5341x3] | If nothing changed in the hostkit, then an updated hostkit release is mostly a matter of bundling updated r3 core libs. |
So the isolation argument is moot. | |
On the contrary, there are bugs in CC which seem to only occur with binaries built from the hostkit. So you have a wider base of testing. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5344] | Updated R3 core libs which *may not work*. Once we are sure that the core works, we can adapt the hostkit to match. For that matter, we made changes that might break existing extensions (I think they won't). |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5345] | If the RT binaries were built from the same sources, that would not be possible. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5346] | They are. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5347x4] | Then the scenario you describe is not possible. |
Either the hostkit is already adapted for the RT built to work. | |
Or it is not, and RT builts from separate sources. | |
builds* | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5351x2] | The R3 core libs might not work, because A108 core might not work. |
Most of the host kit problems that end users find and Rt doesn't are compiler or platform related, not due to source differences. | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5353x2] | Then your testing point is moot. |
Just release pre-built binaries along with the hostkit, and let users test however they wish. | |
older newer | first last |