World: r4wp

I suggest to change the relaive part of "Readme.md" to:

Running the Red/System hello script
------------------------

1. From the REBOL console type:

    `call/show ""` ; (type this only once to fix Rebol 2 bug)

    `change-dir %red-system/`

2. Type: 

    `do/args %rsc.r "%tests/hello.reds"`
	

    the compilation process should finish with a `...output file size` 
    message.


3. The resulting binary is in `red-system/builds/`, go try it! type 
(on Windows):

    `call/wait/shell/console %builds/hello.exe`

Tell the Red interpreter "find a slash" and it finds one, Now that's 
programming computers! 
Hurray for file! support!

Right, it could teach Rebolbot a few tricks. ;-)

Marco: thanks for the proposition. Exposing Rebol bug in the first 
commands that a new user has to type to run Red compiler, is really 
not appealing.

Also, this bug occurs only on Windows, so having users from other 
platfomrs type it too is overkill. I would like to reduce the steps 
and commands to type for running the Red(/System) compiler (especially 
for the first time), not increase them.

Fortunately, these steps are temporary, once we get the compiler 
encapped, it should be a one-liner.

Kaj, about relaxing errors in interpreter (avoiding quiting), it 
is easy to achieve (just remove the `halt` found in interpreter and 
%context.reds), but it is problematic because letting these errors 
pass will let the Red stack in an invalid state which will often 
result in subsequent crashes (until we add proper error support in 
Red).


So, I propose an alternative solution: add VALUE? (and maybe other 
natives if required), to allow you to validate the input before DOing 
it. What do you think?

Would that work on LOAD?

Can't you just return unset! from an undefined path, like for an 
undefined word?

I suppose the ReadLine library I use in console-pro can be programmed 
for multi-line input, but I don't know how, so it currently takes 
single lines

On Windows, it works the same as yours

Endo, people without cookies can't see anything on Trello

red>> [w:]
== 
*** Runtime Error 1: access violation
*** at: 084980F3h

Oh, that's probably the missing load/all

Yes, but:

red>> do [w:]
== 
*** Runtime Error 32: segmentation fault
*** at: 096F70F2h

I get here:

red>> do [z:]
==
*** Script error: action 6 not defined for type: 0

Can't you just return unset! from an undefined path, like for an 
undefined word?

I will give it a try.

Nenad - Happy Birthday to you, and so to your brain-child - Red :-)

Thanks Peter! :-)

If it's Doc's birthday, we should give him a present and donate to 
his child's future. 

Happy Birthday Doc.

HBD, doc. :-)

Thanks guys! :-)

Made a little donation - happy birthday!

I will donate in few days, once my salary arrives :-)

Remember, I'm matching donations, birthday or not, until the end 
of the month, so Doc gets double presents.

Nick: got it, thank you very much!

Happy Birthday Doc!

I thought it was last month, Doc, but if it was today, happy birthday!

Thanks!

With the latest version, I still get

red>> do [z:]
== 
*** Runtime Error 1: access violation
*** at: 0851C0F3h

That's in console-pro. Oddly, in your console, it indeed gives the 
action error

Would it be hard to have the undefined warnings print the name of 
the undefined word/path?

Actually, that's part of error! handling, I can't do it right now 
it would delay the release too much...

I can have a quick look at it though, if it's just a few lines of 
code, I'll add it.

Doc, what is your opinion about what FOR and FOREACH should do for 
the obviously never advancing case? Error triggered or nothing done?

Is there a CC ticket about that?

At first look, I'd say nothing done as it can be useful to disable 
a code block in a loop passing 0 as looping number (or empty block 
in case of FOREACH).

Are we talking about never advancing or never executing?

Never executing. Never advancing means executing endlessly.

That method of disabling a loop block would be in addition to passing 
none as the data (for foreach)?

In that case, it seems obvious to me to do nothing. That's a regular 
construct in programs

red>> do *
Error: feature not implemented yet!
bash-4.0#

I tried avoiding the error propagatin, but it's too complex, so it 
will stay as is until error! is implemeted.

The changes I made in the interpreter for not exiting the console 
on errors have a very bad side-effect: some errors are passing silently 
through the unit tests and are not reported! :-/

Hm, well, I suppose it's good practice for implementing error! ;-)

I can't on error! until next week, my planning is full.

<work>

This one has an assortment of effects: