World: r4wp

Excuses have reasons.

Lets dress the clothing of someone which should adopt something new 
rather and unknown instead of something old and well known.

That programmer should adopt an ALPHA labeled product that let flash 
in his mind difficulties like "BUGS, NO DOCUMENTATION, SUDDEN CHANGES"

Apart from Unicode, we have no comparison over REBOL2 for new and 
better feature which could motivate the programmer.


Ladislav, consideer that people are humans. They have obstacles in 
their life. It is our role to understand which obstacles they have 
and how to "reframe the context" to avoid them.

I think that my situation is more common than we think.

R3 needs some marketing action to promote itself and lets people 
feel they can use it.

Apart from Unicode, we have no comparison over REBOL2 for new and 
better feature which could motivate the programmer.
 - wrong again, you surely heard about:
- essentially all cycles being natives in R3
- money implemented as a "truly decimal" format

- functions implemented differently to be compatible with multithreading, 
etc.
- closures implemented natively
- Parse improved significantly
- R3GUI improved
- new modules feature
- I do not even have the time to list all...

As I said, and need not take back: excuses

Ladislay - you yet again missinterpret what I expressed in my message 
above. I don't care about removal of reactors, it is not about actors 
vs reactors. I clearly posted points, which I don't understand - 
simply I don't understand, what is architecture behind on-action. 
And that's all.

Yes, it takes time to get into this new stuff, especially since things 
are moving. But hey, that's how it is. So, either wait (perhaps forever) 
or just start.

You can ask all questions, and we will answer.

Everone from our team stated that we will help.

About excuses - there are imo no excuses. As I said - we are just 
few, and ppl are busy with other things too. As for those really 
needing GUI right now (it's not me for e.g.), I think, that some 
ppl prefer what they know R2 VID, RebGUI, just because of typical 
entry barrier. There is nothing wrong with R3-GUI imo, and from what 
I studied in the past, it is much better system than R2. Sometimes, 
it is difficult to find out real reasons, why ppl react this way, 
or that way, I just dunno ...

And while doing this, if you start writing it down for others that 
would be great. And, we get feedback what's not a good design etc.

That's how I think a community should work together.

I think that there is no way to take it as offense. Noone said a 
bad word against R3-GUI today imo ...

no way=no need ...

I don't take it that way.

I'm just wondering why things don't lift up... and the explanation 
given. I'm just wondering.

Well, just count ppl here ... how many ppl are active? Even this 
channel is now split between here and Stack Overflow ...

From my experience one of the golden rules of life is (wow that gets 
philosophical): Waiting doesn't change thigns, you need to do it.

Sure, but if this is the conclusion, we better stop today and use 
something different.

Yes, I know - if I would have to write some small util for me, it 
surely would be R3 nowadays. The only thing I might miss is better 
CALL and maybe ftp protocol. But it can be solved ....

And of course time is limited, tell me. Nevertheless, if it's important 
people will do things.

Imo MaxV is trying to do the stuff, just look into his blog. He is 
just comparing what he was used to, with his new experience imo

Ladislav, my role in life is not to label what human beings are doing 
but change the way they look at things to overcome their obstacles.

Excuses come from tipical rapresentation of the reality inside ones 
mind.

Could you please complete the list of changes in REBOL3 than REBOL2 
? Your is very valuable information.

Could you please complete the list of changes in REBOL3

 - that is a problem: I do not think such a list can be made "complete". 
 Some changes actually are "code cleanup", e.g. Also, there is a time 
 problem: I would have to browse R3 Chat, CureCode, AltMe, DocBase, 
 Carl's blog, Carl's R3 doc, GitHub, whatnot to do it. Why do you 
 think I am the one who has got the time to do it?

OK, to be of some help I decided to compile a couple of notes of 
this kind as an article for the future reference/improvement.

Thanks Ladislav !

Great!

To all people who want to dare in Documentation R3 GUI labirinth 
, you may use http://rebol.informe.com/wiki/view/Main_Pageto help 
community.

I think it could be a good start. However, Ladislav usualli works 
on REBOL wiki.

I'm not waiting for anything in particular WRT R3. I am very anxious 
to have time to start using it more, and I am grateful to the Saphirion 
team for taking the lead on it and doing so much work. Because they 
have, I decided that what time I can make right now I will put behind 
Red, as I think I can provide more value there, and to give Doc some 
support for all his work too.

I'm also going to post more thoughts and questions about funcs, like 
I did with SPLIT-PATH, because now is the time to make any changes, 
IMO.

Ren is a new distraction now too. :-) But I think it will be good 
for all of us.

Please, may you add some examples in the following pages?
http://rebol.informe.com/wiki/view/Rebol_3-set-face
http://rebol.informe.com/wiki/view/Rebol_3-get-face

How do you like this "Implementation artefact":

f: make function! reduce [[x /local x-v y-v] body: [
	x-v: either error? try [get/any 'x] [
		"x does not have a value!"
	] [
		rejoin ["x: " mold/all :x]
	]
	y-v: either error? try [get/any 'y] [
		"y does not have a value"
	] [
		rejoin ["y: " mold/all :y]
	]
	print [x-v y-v]
]]

g: make function! reduce [[y /local x-v y-v] body]

>> f 1
x: 1 y: 1

(specailly Andreas should have a look)

Just for comparison, these results are from R2:

f: make function! [x /local x-v y-v] body: [
	x-v: either error? try [get 'x] [
		"x does not have a value"
	] [
		rejoin ["x: " mold/all :x]
	]
	y-v: either error? try [get 'y] [
		"y does not have a value"
	] [
		rejoin ["y: " mold/all :y]
	]
	print [x-v y-v]
	unless value? 'y [g 2]
]

g: make function! [y /local x-v y-v] body

>> f 1
x: 1 y does not have a value
x does not have a value y: 2

http://issue.cc/r3/2025

Very good catch, Ladislav. A rather nasty bug.

(remedy is not hard, already found out how to correct it)

Point the "frame" to the full function value instead of just the 
function's body.

- not exactly

(that would be quite incomfortable)

Interested in any alternative fixes, but I see no discomfort for 
the above.

Well, there is some discomfort. REB_FUNCTION values are not garbage 
collected.

However, fortunately, the ARGS series is unique to function (since 
it is created specifically for the function), so it can be used instead 
of the body.

That's indeed rather annoying. Seems the GC leaves much to be desired.

(even if two functions have the same SPEC and BODY, they always have 
distinct ARGS)

Ok. That's better (even though it is a somewhat ugly hack).

Well, but the fact that REB_FUNCTIONs don't need GC is not ugly IMO.