World: r3wp

if you can't trust .. don't do it.

what if runtime provided sandboxing. I know I know much too little 
about rebol but I imagine with all the good stuff  it does something 
like this would not be theoretically impossible ?

A sandbox is a long-time wish of mine:
   http://www.rebol.org/ml-display-thread.r?m=rmlNVBC

REBOL3's security policies start to make it possible:
   http://www.rebol.com/r3/docs/functions/secure.html

you would have to protect all your globals!

yay! now it's a wish of two :)

Let's move this to another group ...

ok which one?

You choose ...

I can hardly ever find what to post where here :=)

Try core ...

Anyway to clear the screen in the console short of starting a new 
session?

you might try with con: open console://, but dunno how to proceed. 
Nor insert nor write works on that port ...

>> probe system/schemes/console
make object! [
    name: 'console
    title: "Console Access"
    spec: none
    info: none
    actor: make native! [[end!]]
    awake: none
]

doesn't seem to do much ...

slightly less functional than the dns scheme

== make object! [
    name: 'dns
    title: "DNS Lookup"
    spec: make object! [
        title: none
        scheme: none
        ref: none
        path: none
        host: none
        port-id: 80
    ]
    info: none
    actor: make native! [[end!]]
    awake: make function! [[event][print event/type true]]
]

:-)

unbelievably .... how much functionality we miss even compared to 
R2. And we dare to call it  "soon"-to-be-beta product

It does have more functionality than rebol1 beta ...

and more than 0.9x alpha ... I still have one somewhere :-)

We have to wait a bit for Carl to come-up from his cave ... hopefully 
he is cooking something here or there :-)

see .. it could be worse

looks like his still doing site maintenance http://twitter.com/rebol3

oh well... time to play with the host kit.  Downloading visual studio 
8 ...

Just to be picky: you can't actually infer from `actor: make native! 
[[end!]]` how much a scheme does

rebol3 is not in a process of production but design + production 
so I would not be too restrictive on carl jumping from one thing 
to another. he is also only one, so he can't just do r3 for 2 years 
straight

Implemented the http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0300.htmlmodule EXPORT 
keyword. See http://curecode.org/rebol3/ticket.rsp?id=1446

Next up is http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0274.htmlcompressed modules/scripts. 
I have some interesting tricks to make them seamless to use and make, 
but I have to get a little sleep before I can really dig in to them.

Do we need SHA256 in checksum ?

Not a bad idea - what uses it?

Amazon

Interesting, how do they use it?

for signing requests

Sounds good. Request it in CureCode.

Eg. Here I use SHA1 http://rebol.wik.is/S3

but I guess they might want to only allow SHA256 in the future

SHA1 has been having problems lately, iirc (which I likely don't).

Do we have an url-encode function?

This doesn't look good ... http://www.curecode.org/rebol3/index.rsp


new issues are being created, but there's a sharp decline in closed 
issues

We were focusing on other things for a while. We're bug fixing now 
though.

I'm concerned about the accumulating syntax errors - not new, newly 
reported. At some point soon we'll have to fix the scanner.

Is there a way to specifiy that you want a timestamp vs date ?

From what? The NOW function, or date! values?

Also, by timestamp do you mean time! values? Cause they aren't timestamps.

the former

now => timestamp
now/date => date

NOW/time returns the time. It's not a timestamp though.

datestamp then ...

Maybe you want NOW/precise/utc.

I want to specify that a datestamp is the required parameter .. and 
that a date is not enough

I don't know the term "datestamp" - what does it mean?

it's the full thing returned by now