World: r4wp

I am a learning scientist (and really always have been) so my interest 
in from the perpective of the learner and the community of learners. 
 This has put me at odds with administrators and teachers at times.

Scot, are you a boat rocker?

So for me learning is "relating" in a particular way to an idea. 
 Much like the habits you mention.  Part of that relationship is 
how much it matters fo the learner to be engaged.

Not just relating to ideas, but people, systems, environment, etc.

I think that ties into "maintaining interest"

Absolutely.

I think that anyone who teaches full time for decades will make all 
the same discoveries, even if we describe them differently.

I think we carry "ways of relating" with us into various contexts 
and situations.  Taking interest is a way of relating.

let's move to chit chat

Good teachers do, but in very individualistic sorts of ways.  I'm 
always struck by how different great teachers are.

to chit chat...

Um...a bit of unexpected behavior here on the Linux ARM version of 
R3:

>> 6.63 / 59
== 0.

>> 6.63 / 59.0
== 4.

Neither are correct.

Bo, I guess you are missing the dtoa.c pull-request from Ladislav 
in your ARM codebase. I bet that will help you.

I'm using the ARM build from rebolsource.net.

(check the official Carl's R3 github repo, It's in the pull-request 
queue)

What that pull request more recent than 24-Jan-2013?

Doesn't the binaries on rebolsource.net only contain accepted pull-requests?

yes, only the accepted ones are built with

So Bo, that's why your ARM binary doesn't behave well.

(I can confirm Anodroid ARM port shows correct result)

OK.  Thanks for the confirmation.

Is this an R3 bug or feature? Duplicate word in a single object....

    ob: object [] append ob  [b: 2 b: 3 b: 4]
    == make object! [
        b: 2
        b: 3
        b: 4
    ]


    foreach w words-of ob [print get w]   ;; they are actually different
    2
    3
    4

that HAS to be a bug.

That what I thought, thanks -- but could not see it in curecode, 
and don't remember it in earlier versions. So it may be Something 
Very Clever :)

Nope, it's an APPEND bug. Please report it (and thanks for all the 
reports lately).

Thanks. Done.
http://curecode.org/rebol3/ticket.rsp?id=1979

@GrahamC: Thanks A LOT for prot-smtp.r and prot-send.r.  I was able 
to send an email from R3, but only after changing a line from:

	ehlo: any [ port/spec/ehlo "rebol3 user pc" ]
to
	ehlo: any [ port/spec/ehlo port/spec/email ]

My smtp server was throwing a 501 5.0.0 Invalid domain name

Thanks .. http://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/message/8019099#8019099

No, thank you!

On R3 ARM:

>> header: [
** Syntax error: missing "]" at "end-of-script"
** Near: (line 1) header: [


I guess we can't cut-n-paste multi-line scripts into the console 
at present.

I don't believe this works anywhere yet.

I tried to find a submitted bug in Curecode, but couldn't find one, 
so I submitted one.

The rebolbot has a multiline console :)

Very cool!

More prot-send.r testing.  Had the hardest time trying to get 'send 
to work with my mail server.  Found I had to change a line in prot-send.r 
to :


 smtp-port: [ scheme: 'smtp host: (user/smtp) user: (user/user) pass: 
 (user/pass) ehlo: (find/tail user/email 
@
) timeout: 600 ]


as EHLO on my SMTP host was expecting only the domain portion of 
the email address instead of the entire email address which is what 
I had been trying.

Bo, Have you forked Graham's scripts to push fixes for these?

Bo, you could have asked me :)

These aren't fixes ... you just have to know what ehlo expects

@GrahamC: I understand what you're saying, but how do mail programs 
like Outlook and Thunderbird figure out what to send EHLO?

The expected EHLO parameter is the client's hostname.

Outlook and Thunderbird can "just" look up what your local machine 
claims to have configured as hostname.

Previously we could use read dns:// .. but that doesn't work in R3

Windows has a gethostname API. I always liked the read dns:// feature 
though.

RANDOM help: "Pick a random value from a series" . The text looks 
a bit inaccurate to me. Wouldn't one of:

Randomly pick a value from a series

or

Pick a value from a series at random


For me, these reflect more accurately what is random. Any opinions?

I like the current text. What makes it unclear, or inaccurate to 
you?

I understand what Ladislav is saying.  The current text implies that 
there is a series of random values, and one will be picked.

Or it could mean that there is a series, and one of the values will 
be picked randomly.

I think Lad's two suggestions are both more clear.

What was wrong with the R2 text?

  "Return single value from series."


But the doc string for 'value isn't helpful with regard to series 
values either.

I would make it a bit more readable though.

  Return a single value from the series.