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

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

BrianH
28-Apr-2008
[10330x2]
Well, for starters:
- Words are unbound by default.
- Modules only load the contexts they are told to.

- Reflection is done by a separate native with some mezzs wrapped 
around it, not the ordinals.
This means (respectively to the above):

- You don't have to block everything, you can just allow what you 
want.

- You can just sandbox a module by having it not load the system 
context, or load your own substitute.

- You only have to eliminate one function to close the reflection 
hole, rather than replacing the ordinals with mezzs, slowing down 
all code.
Henrik
28-Apr-2008
[10332]
hmm... why does launch/quit not work with URLs?
[unknown: 5]
28-Apr-2008
[10333]
Thanks Brian, I suppose I will have to get exposed to that nature 
to understand it.
BrianH
28-Apr-2008
[10334]
Same here: Modules aren't anywhere near done yet :(
Henrik
28-Apr-2008
[10335x2]
the same when I use:

launch http://somewherequit

I wonder what the issue is here.
weird..

launch http://somewherewait 0.01 quit

works
Graham
28-Apr-2008
[10337x2]
Oldes - it's a very old bug
We should try and get that fixed for 2.7.7
Henrik
29-Apr-2008
[10339]
I'm (again) studying how to get LAUNCH to accept args when launching 
a script, when I came across this in the SDK manual:


For example, if you want to launch a second copy of your program 
to process an action:


    launch 
-c do-it"

  It says it's a special function of encapped programs, but does -c 
  do the same thing as for an ordinary rebol executable, namely --cgi?

When 
  using the same string in a regular rebol console, I get just the 
  help output as if the argument list was wrong. It won't accept any 
  other arguments except if the script name is passed as a string.
Anton
29-Apr-2008
[10340]
Oldes, modification date - can you post to Rambo.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10341x2]
Is this a bug?:

>> to-block mold [<]
** Syntax Error: Invalid tag -- <
** Near: (line 1) to-block mold [<]
You might ask why would someone want to mold a block and then use 
to-block on it.  If you have added a block via the console across 
more than one line you will pick up the newline character in your 
block which you can trim/lines on if you mold the block.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10343x2]
Just a syntax side effect. Try: to-block mold [ < ]
< is normally part of a tag, but there is an exception made for when 
it is surrounded by spaces.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10345x3]
Yeah but that would still be a bug wouldn't it?
>>  to-block mold [ < ]
** Syntax Error: Invalid tag -- <
>> attempt [to-block mold [<]]
** Syntax Error: Invalid tag -- <
** Near: (line 1) attempt [to-block mold [<]]
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10348]
Unfortunately, there are some REBOL values that mold to bad syntax. 
[<] is bad syntax.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10349]
Yeah.  I'm finding that out.  What about the attempt?  Shoudn't that 
have contained the error?
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10350]
>> attempt [to-block mold [ < ]]
== none
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10351x2]
what version is that?
ok I see I didn't have the spaces on the attempt one
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10353]
In your version, the syntax error was at load time, before the attempt 
was called.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10354]
This isn't good for dynamic data.  If something is populated dynamically 
then would have to account for the spaces and check the dynamic data.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10355]
>> mold [ < ]
== "[<]"
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10356x2]
Yeah but that isn't acceptable for me.
I would classify that as a workaround and the problem still to be 
a bug.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10358]
I said it was unfortunate :(
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10359]
hehe
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10360]
It used to be the case for to-file "" too.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10361]
ahhh well hopefully we can get it fixed.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10362]
>> [>]
== [>]
Not a problem for <
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10363]
Yeah just the one needs fixed then.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10364]
>> [<
[    ]
== [<
]
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10365]
yeah that is why I need the mold to trim the lines from something 
like that.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10366x2]
>> [ < ]
== [<]
>> new-line [ < ] true
== [
    <
]
Same value, different display.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10368]
>> c
== "[<]"
>> d: []
== []
>> append d to-word c
== [[<]]
>> e: first d
== [<]
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10369x2]
>> mold new-line [< ] true
== "[^/    <^/]"
It's a little longer, but at least it will load and have the same 
value.
btiffin
29-Apr-2008
[10371]
On this I tried    a: pick first system/words 122   (umm 122 will 
vary of course)  
b: make binary! 0     save/all b a   c: to block!  b
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10372]
>> new-line load mold new-line [< ] true false
== [<
]
>> mold new-line load mold new-line [< ] true false
== "[<^/]"
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10373x2]
I'm staying away from load
just for my purposes anyway
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10375]
As long as you control the save, load is all right
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10376x2]
I think appending might be my solution for my purposes.
I can't have the newline in the block.
BrianH
29-Apr-2008
[10378]
Right, you read/lines.
[unknown: 5]
29-Apr-2008
[10379]
Thanks guys, I think I got a solution.