World: r4wp

err: "as meaningful"

copying:

http://issue.cc/r3/2006

Saw it in R3 group. It's a nice trick, but don't you think that the 
setword used in such place might confuse readers? (at first look, 
I read [i: 100]...)

We shall se what the preferences are...

(At least I hope so)

Using [i:] instead of i: would remove the possible confusion, but 
it looks a bit inelegant.

Wouldn't it look confusing, if one would like (not sure anyone would 
to :-) to use something like:

 repeat i: j: 10 [print [i j]]

confusing? hmm, you can use parentheses to make it more readable:

repeat i: (j: 10) [...]

if you prefer

that's right ... I would understand the code even without parentheses, 
I think ....

Append/dup, thanks all for testing. Not sure how I could have broken 
anything by just adding doc strings to boot.red, but it's not just 
spaces for me here (Win7):

red>> s: copy ""
== ""
red>> append/dup s #"1" 10
== 10
red>> s
== "1"
red>> length? s
== 1

I will have to test more. If I just paste the original append source 
into the console (i.e. all doc strings removed), calling append then 
crashes.

If I rebuild the console with the version of append that has no doc 
strings, it works fine. Interesting.

It's having the doc string on the /dup refinement itself that causes 
it.

Take that out and it works fine.

It looks like that 's the case for all refinements that take an arg. 
If you have a doc string before the arg, it causes the arg to be 
ignored.

Can someone please confirm?

Testing with a string! between a refinement and its argument, I get 
odd results (but no crashes so far). Definitely a bug.

Do you want a bug report, or have you logged it yourself?

We need a bugtracker entry for this one, if you're on it, please 
add it.

red>> get 'x
red>> type? get 'x
==
red>> print type? get 'x
unset

The second result is the one in question.

Odd...please add it to the bugtracker.

Hmm, I get correct result here:

red>> get 'x
red>> type? get 'x
== unset!

Probably an interference from doc-strings like for APPEND.

Could be.

After pulling your doc-strings locally and recompiling the console 
I get the same output as you.

I need to fix that issue asap, before getting flooded with new tickets. 
:)

:-)

But I need to go to dinner now, so it will have to wait a bit.

How to create a routine which would accept any-type?

I was trying:  r: routine [value [any-type!]][] but got error like:

*** Compilation Error: invalid definition for function exec/r: [value 
[red-any-value!]]

sorry... 

*** Compilation Error: invalid definition for function exec/r: [value 
[red-any-type!]]

The commit to introduce the doc-strings seems to have caused a number 
of tests to fail, a few in the compiler tests but a much bigger number 
in the interpreter tests. For example:

	ok - serialization....................275 / 275
	** - interpreter-serialization*********11 / 275 **

Wow. Even my docs have bugs. I will run test here. Should have done 
that before.

My tests don't test the doc-strings so its definitely not you Gregg 
:-)

I wonder how I can test your doc-strings ?

I've just run the Red tests on both Windows 7 and OS X. Same results 
on both:

** - Red Test Suite******************5331 / 5666 **

Evenetually we can test for missing doc strings and use some for 
reflection test, at the least.

I get the same serialization results here. Great to have so many 
tests Peter, and easy to run.

Does it log results somewhere?

Yes. the log is in Red/quick-test/quick-test.log

Thank Nenad for the tests being easy to run, it's his design.

Excellent. Maybe have the test runner print out the log location 
at the end?

That's a thought.

I've just checked the quick-test docs and see that I forgot to mention 
the log file. I'll certainly need to update the docs.

Oldes: you can't currently as any-type! is not a defined type yet.

Doc-string related bug fixed.

That's great Doc! Only 12 tests fail here now.

There should be only 9 failing, 3 are invalid tests that I'm fixing 
right now, 6 are EXIT/RETURN tests for interpreter (not supported 
yet).

Yes. Looking good.

Pushed the fixes for invalid tests, you should have only 6 failing 
now.

OpenCV 2D lines demo: http://www.wuala.com/fjouen/Code/OpenCV/Red/pub/lines2.jpg/


Webcam driver and videos playback code example in Red/System can 
be found in this thread: http://www.digicamsoft.com/cgi-bin/rebelBB.cgi?thread=%3C17Mar2013190850930275100%3E


François is close to 100% covering of OpenCV for Red/System. Once 
that (huge) work done, we would need to create some good dialect 
to access all those features from Red.