World: r4wp

I don't really understand. The interpreter never halted on undefined 
words, only undefined paths

Same thing.

Paths error out because there's an undefined word in them.

I know, but you didn't remove a HALT from word evaluation because 
I asked

Well, actually, I did. :)

But I will them all back, user errors should make the app exit, currently 
it's the best way.

That's why I told you before to validate the user input in order 
to avoid errors as much as possible.

(Until we can catch them properly with TRY)

I don't remember you saying that, but I'm looking into it

But it seems we misunderstood each other. :)

Obviously

See my post on Sun 23:49

Oh, I see, you were going to implement VALUE? for validation. I just 
didn't think you meant checking the entire input; I thought you were 
talking about the result

I meant the whole user input, mainly for catching undefined words/paths 
and hanlding the error out of DO.

Maybe I will do it myself in the console script...

Thinking about it, that would reject any user code that uses words 
as symbols, wouldn't it?

I have a loop written that does the evaluation, even without VALUE? 
but it doesn't seem like a good idea to me

red>> x: load "view button" forall x [print unset? get x/1]      
     
false
true

Undefined single words were never a problem in the interpreter before. 
That's why I could write Redpages with a header:

Red []

They were simply ignored. After I requested the warning message, 
the Red word produces such a warning, so for now I write:

'Red []

By the way, are get-paths supposed to work?

Nope, not yet.

DO doesn't support a Red header yet.

You should strip it from a LOADed block before passing it to DO.

I know, but it worked

I need to fix some interpreter issues revealed by Peter's port of 
~2500 tests to the interpreter. There's about a dozen failing tests 
to fix.

Once that done, I will have a look again at those error reporting 
issues.

I agree that it is not yet possible to deeply validate user input. 
I'll see if I can find a cheap workaround for the release.

OK, thanks

7 failing tests to go until complete equivalence between Red compiler 
and interpreter. :-)

nice progress

Great!

Nice!

I'm getting a weird crash if I load the following in the GTK-browser:

function [] [
	[text]
]

bash-4.0# ./GTK-browser test.red 

*** Runtime Error 1: access violation
*** at: 08063687h

It doesn't happen if I load it in the console

This fixes it:

function [] [
	text: ""
	[text]
]

But this doesn't:

function [] [
	text: none
	[text]
]

Actually, it crashes by just loading:

none

Sorry, strike that last one

I've put it in the tracker

Great stuff guys,  been taking a bit more time to get to know RED. 
 Great work Doc, Kaj, Peter, and the rest of the testers and submitters.

Thanks, glad you like it :-)

I do.  Good work!