World: r3wp

Trick is to remember that the do block is evaluated prior to the 
display being shown, so you just have to use:

	display "" [
		p: panel green data [] false
		f: field false
		do [p/show?: f/show?: true]
	]
	do-events

Thanks

but isn't the layout constructed first otherwise the variable names 
would not be available?

Yes, but doing a show or hide prior to view doesn't work.

Ok.

in lists and tables, scroll bars appear dynamicallly

Is it feasible to do the same for area widget?

The reason most UI's dont do this is you either have to reserve space 
for the slider, leaving an empty area, or dynamically readjust the 
text to fit ... which annoys users as the number of lines changes 
on them. So, no. ;)

Ashley - well, how often there is the change of text size, so that 
there is, or is not the need for slider? ;-) Once?

How about using Chris' script to support input-patterns: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=filtered-import.r

How do you get a slider to react to the mouse wheel?

move the wheel?

I'm pretty sure mouse wheel support is implemented.

Yeah, it's not reacting.  I've tried forcing focal-face, no effect. 
 ??

I've tried a custom widget with an  action: make default-action [ 
 but I might be missing
something simple but critical...

From what I can understand from other widget code, say area...the 
on-scroll is sent to

the area...I need it to go right to the slider for the scheme I'm 
attempting...  Umm, I think...

You have to do it indirectly, as in:

display "" [
	p: panel data [slider] on-scroll [
		var: face/pane/1
		var/data: var/data + either negative? scroll/y [-.1][.1]
		show var
	]
	do [system/view/focal-face: p]
]

Ashley;  Thanks.

Works nicely.  Need to build the boundary fences, but works nicely. 
 Thanks again.

New error for me ..


An error has occurred.  If this occurred with an upgrade, please 
revert to the older version for the meantime, and report the error 
message as documented below.

make object! [
    code: 501
    type: 'access
    id: 'not-open
    arg1: "Port"
    arg2: none
    arg3: none
    near: [repeat i p/cols [
            line/pane/:i/offset/x: col-offset 
            line/pane/:i/size/x: p/widths/:i - sizes/cell 
            all [
                p/pane/2/show? 
                i = p/cols 

                line/pane/:i/size/x: line/pane/:i/size/x + (p/size/x - p/pane/2/size/x 
                - (line/pane/:i/offset/x + line/pane/:i/size/x))
            ] 

            line/pane/:i/text: replace/all form pick p/data index - 1 * cols 
            + i "^/" "¶" 

            line/pane/:i/font/color: either find p/options 'no-action [
                black
            ] [
                either find picked index [white] [black]
            ] 
            col-offset: col-offset + pick widths i
        ]]
    where: 'confirm
]

Well, that looks like the face-iterator logic (used by table and 
text-list) ... any idea what was being done at the time (i.e. table 
just about to be displayed, row double-clicked on, etc)?

None of those as I recall.

Build#95 uploaded to SVN. Contains new 'on keyword and request-char 
function. 'on is used to specify multiple action handlers at once, 
as in:

	display "" [
		field
		field on [
			scroll [print scroll/y]
			focus [print "Got here!"]
		]
	]

%tour.r updated to demonstrate new request-char function.

Ashley;  How hard would it be to allow set-path! for widget variables? 
 Or am I missing

something that would allow widget variables to be held in an object!? 
 I'm fairly prone
to missing things  :)

You mean something like:

	b: "Bob"
	display "" [a: field b]

which is already supported, or something else?

No I mean something like

fields: make object! [
   a: b: c: none
]

display "Test" [fields/a: field  fields/b: field  fields/c: field]

No [to supporting that]. The preferred approach would be:

	obj: make object! [
		a: "Bob"
		f: does [display "" [field b]]
	]
	obj/f

typo "field b" -> "field a"

Thanks Ashley.

Would pathes help? I think the change to support that could be small.

I was looking at (and don't grasp all the implications of) the parsing 
 set-word!  occurances and how a set-path! may be inserted.  But...it 
looked too simple, so it had to be wrong.  :)  And again, I don't 
get all the implications, so I'm completely accepting of Ashley's 
nice short no.

make object! [
    code: 501
    type: 'access
    id: 'not-open
    arg1: "Port"
    arg2: none
    arg3: none

    near: [line/pane/:i/font/color: either find p/options 'no-action]
    where: 'confirm
]

face-iterator init func as it tries to create a table ... now that 
one should be reproducable?

I'm just logging errors here as they occur!

so I can add traps around them and then log them to the rebgui.log

Are these errors you're generating or your users are generating? 
I've got a dozen or so users who've been pounding away at a large 
RebGUI app for almost 2 years now, and the rebgui.log files on their 
PC's are pretty much empty. Might just be a case of YMMV ;)

these are ones I am generating :(

btiffin, maybe this works:
fields: context [a: b: c: none]

display "test" compose [(to-set-word in fields 'a) field (to-set-word 
in fields 'b) field]

Hey...that should get rid of a few more globals, cool.  Thanks Ashley. 
 First tests worked great. :)

Anton, very cool. I'll think I'll add that trick to the [RebGUI] 
cookbook.

Anton;  Yep, thanks.  This has opened up all kinds of RebGUI goodness.

well, but will it bind those variables to those one in 'fields object?

Ah it works, good :) I couldn't remember if the binding was kept 
or not.

Pekr, do you know what   in fields 'a   means ?

yes, from the help ....

I am just not sure, if the 'a in the 'display is the same as in the 
'fields ....

Check this out:
>> o1: context [a: 1]
>> o2: context [a: 200]
>> print probe compose [(in o1 'a) (in o2 'a)]
[a a]
1 200

I mean - does it create global 'a, referencing fields/a?

The only concern for me was if to-set-word kept the binding. (I guess, 
possibly, long ago it did not.)

yes, but you are creating global var anyway, no? via the set-word?