World: r3wp

When I trace it, it "sees" the error but returns the path:
...
Trace:  return (word)
Trace:  path (word)
Result: (error)
Result: (error)
Result: (error)
Result: %.../ (file)

There is a cross-platform bug in R3 where it won't see any file or 
directory that starts with two periods, not just . and .. - the ticket: 
http://issue.cc/r3/1899

This may be unrelated though.

It is possible to make this directory under OSX, as far as I can 
see.

The particular error triggered in the Windows console when you try 
to make a directory with only periods in its name is that the directory 
already exists; this is probably a bad error. However, when you try 
to MAKE-DIR directories that already exist in REBOL, it's a noop, 
not an error. That is probably why it's not triggering an error here.

wish for R3 / Topaz / Red / World:

callback! datatype so you can "really" use a lot of nice shared libraries.

Do you have a simple example?

display: make callback! [...] [...]
glutDisplayFunc :display

Red/System has native callbacks already. I'm using them in most library 
bindings

Right. Red/System seems vary nice.

I am waiting for floats to be implemented in Red/System. Is there 
a "math" library that could be used intead?

I've bound the standard C math library already, but it's waiting 
for the floats

With R3 you can just callback functions if you want a synchronous 
call, or callback through an event if you want to go asynchronous.

Still, a generator of marshalling wrapper functions would be nice, 
especially since REBOL and C don't have similar data models.

But R3 can't deal very good with multi-threaded libs. You need to 
trick it: Use async with non or integer value to trigger a sync call 
on Rebol side.

Any info about the algorithms used to construct and perform lookup 
on symbol's tables in R3 ?
People gave some hints back in the day.
But I can't remember who.

Wondering if there is an analogy of

    query/clear system/words

Now that you mention it, I'm wondering that too. There isn't any 
tracking of state changes for R3 objects that I'm aware of, and there's 
nothing like system/words.

Well, it is not a big "disaster" for me, since it is not too hard 
for me to adjust the function I am writing for R3 with just a slight 
modification of the behaviour...

Ladislav, I think you already wrote something like that for R3?

newly-defined?: func [
	{do the given BLOCK and find the newly-defined words}
	block [block!]
	/local old
] [
	old: append append
		defined? system/contexts/lib
		defined? system/contexts/sys
		defined? system/contexts/user
	do block
	exclude defined? system/contexts/user old
]

Cyphre, it's not a good approach in R3

To track newly defined words in a context you can check the source 
of the function INTERN.

I may be completely missing the point, Steeve. How exactly can the 
source of the INTERN function help with detection?

Its tracking newly "created" words in the user context after a binding. 
It's maybe not what you're trying to do but it was in response to 
Cyphre.

What I (essentially) want is described in the help string:

    {do the given BLOCK and find the newly-defined words}

Can the source of INTERN cannot help me with that?

typo: "Can the source of INTERN help me with that?

I probably mistaken the words "newly-defined" for "newly-created"

I originally pointed out how implemented the functionality in R2 
(using the 

    query/clear system/words

expression.

You want to track the "modified" words, right ?

ok

newly-defined
 is confusing :-)

Terminological problem, yes

However, I do not track "modified", since that is a bit more complicated/slower 
than I like.

Still I wonder, what is the so called defined? function ?
Where can I find it ?

Steeve... I guess Ladislav is looking for something like this R2 
helper script:
gbl-test: func [
    code
    /all
    /init {returns string with all global variables set to none}
    /local gbl-list words str_init
][
    words: make block! 50
    str_init: make string! 1000
    gbl-list: query/clear system/words
    do code
    if block? gbl-list: query system/words [
        foreach item gbl-list [
            if any [all value? item] [
                insert tail words to-word item
                if init [
                    insert tail str_init join to-word item ": "
                ]
            ]
        ]
    ]
    if init [
        write clipboard:// join str_init "none"
    ]
    words
]
>> gbl-test [a: 1]
== [a]
>> f: func[a][b: a + 1] gbl-test [f a: 1]
== [a b]

The above script I was using to detect leaking variables

>> gbl-test [ o: context [a: 1] ]
== [o]
>> gbl-test [ o: context [a: 1 set 'b 2] ]
== [b o]

(of course without the init part - that was for my personal use) 
it's pretty old script, I almost forgot I have it:)

Ok ok, but I just want to have a look on the functions Cyphre pointed 
out :)

I suspect something odd ;-)

Ah.. I see... the defined? function is not defined:)

I should try it first, my mistake.

defined?: func either rebol/version >= 2.100.0 [[
	{find all defined words in the given context}
	context [any-object!]
	/local words
]][[
	{find all defined words in the given context}
	context [object!]
	/local words	
]][
	words: first context
	remove-each word words [not value? word]
	words
]

ah, bad code, needs correction

this looks more likely:

defined?: either rebol/version >= 2.100.0 [
	func [
		{find all defined words in the given context}
		context [any-object!]
		/local words
	][
		words: words-of context
		remove-each word words [not value? word]
		words		
	]
][
	func [
		{find all defined words in the given context}
		context [object!]
		/local words	
	][
		words: bind first context context
		remove-each word words [not value? word]
		words
	]
]

Thanks

One year left from last Carl's blog entry in R3 blog. Sad anniversary.

Yes, indeed. We should concetrate upon what we have. And we have 
clones, plus existing RT's products, which are still useable, although 
we would like to see them progress further. If Carl does not return 
to R3 one day, nor does he release its sources, it was big 5+ years 
of wasted time imo ...

Not a waste ... it has provided the drive to produce derivatives

It also suppressed the production of derivatives at the time

To be fair, that is because it was good enough

yes, it is usable.