r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[RAMBO] The REBOL bug and enhancement database

Volker
8-Mar-2006
[1602]
Seems so. But i had a memory-leak by this. Seems making objects is 
not that common when the gui is set up. Then extend incomming objects 
with a default one, in that case it drove me mad.
Ashley
13-Mar-2006
[1603]
Anyone had problems with 'switch and datatype! I've reduced the problem 
down to:

t: func [v] [
	select [
		#[datatype! integer!]	["A"]
		#[datatype! decimal!]	["B"]
		#[datatype! block!]	["C"]
	] type? v
]

>> t 1
== ["A"]
>> t 1.0
== ["B"]
>> t []
== decimal!

Unless there's an obvious explanation, I'll RAMBO it.
Gabriele
14-Mar-2006
[1604x3]
the explanation is this:
>> find [1 a []] block!
== [[]]
>> find [1 a []] word!
== [a []]
>> find [1 a []] integer!
== [1 a []]
so, use type?/word
Robert
14-Mar-2006
[1607x2]
Is this intended?
>> all [true true true]
== true
>> all [true true false]
== none
>> all [false false false]
== none
Why don't I get back FALSE in the 2nd and 3rd case?
Pekr
14-Mar-2006
[1609x2]
hmm, strange, it should be false imo :-)
RAMBO it, please, they will dismiss it at max, if it is not a bug, 
but I think it is ...
Robert
14-Mar-2006
[1611]
Ok, submitted.
Gabriele
14-Mar-2006
[1612]
not sure if it can be said to be a bug, but i see the reasoning about 
wanting false there, so maybe it can be changed.
Ashley
14-Mar-2006
[1613]
Thanks Gabriele, *so* obvious in hindsight (my workaround was to 
move the block! condition to the top of the list, but type?/word 
is a good refinement to remember!)
Coccinelle
15-Mar-2006
[1614x2]
If all [true true false] should return false, all [true true none] 
should return false or none ?
same question for any : any [false false false]  should return false 
or none ?
Gabriele
15-Mar-2006
[1616x2]
any is more difficult to change it that case. any "returns the first 
value that is not none or false". there is no such value in that 
block - so what should it do?
should it return the last value anyway?
Coccinelle
15-Mar-2006
[1618]
For me any and all should never return false. That's my opinion.
Robert
15-Mar-2006
[1619x3]
The problem I see is that I often use ANY and ALL as a condition 
and it it returns NONE I can't do anything with it. IMO this pattern 
should be possible:
	either ANY [...][yes][no]
DESCRIPTION:

     Shortcut AND. Evaluates and returns at the first FALSE or NONE.
     ALL is a native value.
How about returning than either FALSE or NONE which every was hit? 
That makes sense to me. So I can ensure that my app returns FALSE 
and that this value is returned. But now I return FALSE and get back 
NONE.
Rebolek
15-Mar-2006
[1622]
If you want to return FALSE instead of NONE, use FOUND?

>> found? any [true true false]
== true
>> found? all [true true false]
== false
Pekr
15-Mar-2006
[1623]
:-)
Coccinelle
15-Mar-2006
[1624]
I don't see the problem with either any [...][yes][no] :
>> either ANY [true false]["yes"]["no"]
== "yes"
>> either ANY [false false]["yes"]["no"]
== "no"
Gabriele
15-Mar-2006
[1625x2]
robert: either takes any value, false or none are "false", anything 
else is "true".
also, yes, found? is the default way to make a value into a logic! 
. not is also a nice way to do that, when you can/need to reverse 
the logic.
Robert
17-Mar-2006
[1627x2]
found? is the most elegant one so far. But the word's meaning isn't 
that good in such a case. I didn't searched anything...
Using EITHER and hence mapping the result on TRUE or FALSE is IMO 
a hack. It works (that's how I do it) but it's not logical. Maybe 
a refinment for ANY and ALL makes sense.
	ALL/logical and ANY/logical

I can see situations where it's very handy that ANY will return the 
result of some actions and not only TRUE and FALSE.
Gregg
17-Mar-2006
[1629x2]
You can use TO LOGIC! directly, or write a mezz with a better name, 
that wraps it.
Something like RESULT? maybe, and it could also handle unset values 
if that's needed.
Rebolek
17-Mar-2006
[1631]
Robert: I think, ANY and ALL are meant for little bit 'wilder' things 
than returning TRUE or FALSE. Remember they return *AT* first false 
or none, it's not that they should return FALSE - which is important

simple example
>> a: 5
== 5
>> all [a < 3 a: a + 1]
== none
>> a
== 5
>> a: 1
== 1
>> all [a < 3 a: a + 1]
== 2
>> a
== 2
Robert
17-Mar-2006
[1632]
Yes, I know. And I often use this feature as well. That's why I think 
the refinement approach is best.
ChristianE
17-Mar-2006
[1633x4]
>> true?: :found?
>> true? all [conditon-1 conditon-2 conditon-3]
>> true? any [conditon-1 conditon-2 conditon-3]
A bit surprising though is:
>> true? all []
== true
At least it conforms to it's description saying "Shortcut AND. Evaluates 
and returns at the first FALSE or NONE." There was no first none 
or false.
[unknown: 10]
20-Mar-2006
[1637x3]
double colors in 'draw dilect does crsh view... Is that known?
Without the use of line-pattern..
effect: [ draw [ 
			pen gray silver
			line-width 15
			line-join round        
			line 22x220 150x350
	 ] ]
Anton
21-Mar-2006
[1640]
I confirm on WinXP.
DideC
21-Mar-2006
[1641]
So am I.
Maxim
21-Mar-2006
[1642]
discovered it last week... I imagined it was a known bug... but I 
didn't check  ':-/
DideC
21-Mar-2006
[1643x2]
It's in RAMBO #4040 http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=4040&
Cyphre said it's fixed, but not release yet (if I understand correctly)
Rebolek
21-Mar-2006
[1645]
Yes, I think I reported that bug to Cyphre during work on Compo demo. 
I hope there will be upgrade to View to fix this and other bugs, 
but I'm afraid that with R3 behind the door (you now, in just couple 
of days we're going to see the roadmap ;-), bugfixes for current 
View will be late.
Pekr
21-Mar-2006
[1646x2]
:-) so we've got more couples of days, so what :-)
but look, I am not sure - Carl told us that submissions for 1.3.3 
should be submitted by us .... why Rebol 3.0 should prevent new View 
release, if bugs are already fixed? It is worth release then, even 
if no new additional functionality is released (as rich-text etc.)
Anton
25-Mar-2006
[1648]
Just noticed daylight savings ended. Windows changed the timezone 
from +11:00 to +10:00, but rebol still reports 
>> now
== 26-Mar-2006/2:09:58+11:00
Vincent
26-Mar-2006
[1649]
RAMBO #3650 "crc32 function added to checksum" - I have just contributed 
a crc32 function to the rebol library. It's quite slow, but the rebcode 
version is fast enough. CRC-32 is still used by common tools (archivers...), 
and an implementation in the 'checksum native would be useful.
Graham
26-Mar-2006
[1650]
Do all these crc functions require the whole file to be read into 
memory?
Vincent
26-Mar-2006
[1651]
Yes - both the native 'checksum and the published 'crc-32 works on 
a string! or a binary!, not a port! . For crc-32, the crc must be 
initialized at start, and complement'ed (bitwise 'not) at end.