World: r3wp

Our primary concern is that RM Asset needs to use R3 very soon for 
a production app for a customer, so the focus is to make all things 
that are normally handcranked in VID and RebGUI, such as form validation, 
handling of database records and a complete UI test framework fully 
automatic. If it takes 2 days instead of 7 to build and test a GUI, 
Robert saves money and can ship earlier.


Over the past year, with the rather big RebGUI app, NLPP, that RM 
Asset has built, we've learned exactly where we need to make things 
better and what works OK and certain delays, because of GUI architecture 
limitations have cost money. It's no longer for convenience or for 
advertizing the GUI as easy, but hard money savings are involved.

I'm not sure I follow this "It's no longer for convenience or for 
advertizing the GUI as easy" - so the current intent is to get something 
out the door as opposed to creating the easiest to use UI framework?

no, it's both things. The GUI system must be easy and quick to work 
with. That's how we build apps.

As such, what we're doing is also in your interest. :-)

and is much appreciated!

I think eye-candy is a very important aspect and, as Henrik said, 
making a GUI that is breathtaking and rememberable is a lot of work 
but worth doing it.

And we will come to it after the basic infrastructure is done and 
stablizes.

I think that if someone really wants, why not to post mock-ups? Even 
if those would not be implemented in the end? It would at least provoke 
some discussions. The design is always tricky - everyone of us has 
different taste for what looks cool, nice, or what actually looks 
ugly :-)

I know a guy who recently left Adobe to do GUI design on contract. 
 He was employed as a GUI designer and has been doing it for many 
years now.  I've suggested to him that this 'could' be a good way 
to get some recognition 'IF EVER' R3 made some ripples in the development 
world.  I didn't get a firm committment that he would do it or not, 
but I will follow up to see if he wants to make a submission of a 
mockup or two.

Get him in contact with me.

Perhaps rather discuss the GUI looks we should be considering the 
mechanism of how that look is implemented.  Is it all draw based? 
 No bitmaps at all?

you can use bitmaps inside DRAW

Robert, I've forwarded him an email using the email address here 
in AltME.

Some time ago, I seem to remember some talk of masks to be used with 
styles for pixel accurate hit detection of non rectangular shapes, 
allowing for holes in styles, etc. Is this (still?) planned? If the 
framework allows for both bitmap and vector definition of styles, 
will any accompanying mask match the implementation? i.e. anywhere 
a bitmap is used, an optional bitmap mask could be used and where 
vector elements are used, a set of bezier (or other type) of curves 
would be optionally used for masking. If a particular style uses 
both bitmap and vector elements in its definition, would some data 
structure hold both types of masks?

Yes it was discussed, as something missing...

Yes, this is still planned. Not sure how the implementation will 
look like at the moment.

ok then once we have the basic widget set i listed we need to setup 
all the keyboard shortcuts that makes life of one easier... tab navigation 
alt+ underlined key navigation for menu bar and popup menu.


Ok i'm done i return split my lumbs down my bed... GRaham yes somekind 
of nasty flu i lost 20 libs in a week...

so when you were raving before last week, you were delirious ?

... and someone please get ctrl + tab propagated to REBOL. Without 
it, there is no go for switching the tabs by keyboard shortcut. And 
- no excuses or cross-platform crap defending, please :-)

Robert - what is further "low-level" plan? I can see ( http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Host-Kit_Development_Notes
) that we will get A104, A105, which are going to be more of a merge 
releases. But do you have an idea, what will Carl work on next? Not 
that there would not be lots of work ahead :-) ( http://www.rebol.com/rebol3/index.html
) Will e.g. tasking be next?

Two notes here. Please ask Carl for two small changes/additions:


- Add Projects page directly to the right menu here: http://www.rebol.com/rebol3/index.html
- it is simply hidden and can be seen only from a Roadmap page ...

- I thought we already added tasking/IPC methods to the projects 
page. It is imo important and legitimate, and it should be briefly 
added, untill such feature is implemented - http://www.rebol.com/projects.html

What's this? :-) http://rebol.hmkdesign.dk/files/r3/gui/234.png

a discussion we had yesterday about how to produce that layout. the 
SPACING parameter would produce a space around all red squares equal 
in size to the spacing between the squares. this has been changed, 
so that space is not produced and one must use PADDING instead.

can't wait for the time, when you will release some alpha or beta 
of the GUI for us to try our first experiments :-)

it'll be a while yet. have been busy moving projects to RM Asset's 
SVN server and now am working on a build system, which is why I was 
asking for prebol for R3 in the REBOL3 group.

uh ... it almost feels like noone is really working on gui right 
now?

work is being done

graham no ... that was before the flu ... and  i ment every single 
word i said ... this community is firing to it's foot with a 44 magnum 
and doesn't realised it ...

as my futur contribution ? plain and simple their will be none  of 
it ... i shown some thing asked from years now are easy to do and 
i won't do them  to show the lack of serrious and vision of this 
community.


After having being treated the way i have been past week considere 
me as a non active member of this community.


I wish you the best realise your ambitions  even if we all know here 
that it's not possible  for you.

you lack work you lack vision you lack vision but you are greedy 
to take money from others ...  most of the bet now repose on your 
greedyness and lust for monney ... that's not a good fuel for a diying 
community and that's not a process i want to be associate with ...

in the process what is the most disgusting is that instead of turning 
this R3 GUI project a real community effort you sabotaged it you 
let it rote then you proposed your own monney based speudo solution 
that for the moment have produce nothing more than was previously 
done by carl effort after his rejection of Gabriele's work. 


After you can say to me you are in need of monney blah blah that's 
the case for many more than the "elected ones" ... you create a close 
group where the knowledge is retained and not shared. And when someone 
like me comes to get information try to discuss things alternative 
options futur he get insulted and systematically pushed aside.

I predictate your faillure in less than 4 more moth ... January 2011 
maximum the actual bounty hunters R3 group will be disbanded and 
nothing concrete will have been done apart the extraction of VID 
from R3.exe to hostkit. When you take money you do things like professionals 
that's the minimal things this means a list of what will be done. 
A roadmap with important steps and release dates  for those important 
steps before starting anywork you make that dev plan to appreciation 
to the public you debat it serriously you remove things you add things 
... You try to get involve the most possible people that have been 
already involve in R2 GUI use or creation because they have the practice 
knowledge and experience. 


Thousand way of being serrious starting a positive attractive motion 
for this part could have been done but by lack of interrest and generosity 
you end doing what you are doing ...

I predictate your faillure in less than 4 more moth ... January 2011 
maximum the actual bounty hunters R3 group will be disbanded and 
nothing concrete will have been done apart the extraction of VID 
from R3.exe to hostkit. When you take money you do things like professionals 
that's the minimal things this means a list of what will be done. 
A roadmap with important steps and release dates  for those important 
steps before starting anywork you make that dev plan to appreciation 
to the public you debat it serriously you remove things you add things 
... You try to get involve the most possible people that have been 
already involve in R2 GUI use or creation because they have the practice 
knowledge and experience. 


Thousand way of being serrious starting a positive attractive motion 
for this part could have been done but by lack of interrest and generosity 
you end doing what you are doing ...

Stop "predictating" in here. You have groups where nobody will object 
against your "predictates". This is not one of them.

Shadwolf - "as my futur contribution ? plain and simple their will 
be none  of it ..." - ok then, leave us alone, and please save us 
from your constant ranting noone is interested in, especially here 
in that group - please move that to advocacy ... ...

Is there a possibilty of having a noop in the dialect?  Sometimes 
it's convenient when dynamically constructing layouts to put something 
in just as a filler ...

ladislav i foresee what i want and this R3 gui have not better reason 
to succeed than the previous intents since it's based on the same 
main problems to it's achievement in time you will get it.

I have no reason to shut my mouth when i see things so wrong. I exposed 
what i though of this process now please don't fuel me anymore do 
as i was far and in january 2011 remember i said this was going to 
a faillure.

graham, don't know if it's useful, but I think PAD can serve as a 
filler.

pad .. what does it do the object?

PAD is a style, so it produces an object which then moves the next 
faces one grid place forward, just like any other style.

This layout:

view [panel 2 [button pad pad button]]

...produces this:

http://rebol.hmkdesign.dk/files/r3/gui/235.png

yes, that's what I meant .. it adds an unnecessary object to the 
main object

I'm looking for a no-op which does not the graphic object created

alte

r

it's just a dialect syntactic artifice

eg.

condition: either boolean [ button ] [ no-ope ]

view compose/deep [
	button
	(condition)	
	button
]

I'll pass it on.

Why can we use just an IF?

can=can't

That behavior would be consistent with R3's Parse dialect. The actual 
behavior would only be comparable to Parse, since there is no failure 
and backtracking.

Robert, how?