World: r3wp
[Core] Discuss core issues
older newer | first last |
BrianH 26-Mar-2010 [16171] | Yup. And if the monitoring stations have local storage for their data, the central monitor could poll them instead of the other way around. That way you can restart the central monitor. |
Graham 26-Mar-2010 [16172] | Ok, has anyone written such monitors in Rebol yet ? :) |
Steeve 26-Mar-2010 [16173x2] | lol |
you have lot of client/server example around | |
Graham 26-Mar-2010 [16175x2] | Ok, I'll just setup a RPC server to act as the monitor |
I won't be able to grab the PID without some Windows API I guess | |
Steeve 26-Mar-2010 [16177x4] | you don't necessarly need of the PID. On which OS are you running your apps ? |
oh windows ! | |
if it's to kill the processes, then you got this command http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/446/xp_kill_windows_process_command_line_taskkill/ | |
very versatil | |
Graham 26-Mar-2010 [16181] | Windows 2003 and 2008 |
Steeve 26-Mar-2010 [16182x2] | you should have the same, no ? |
I mean, to be able to kill a process just with its name | |
Graham 26-Mar-2010 [16184x2] | except I am running multiple processes with the same name |
I really only need to remove a process if it has died ... and is sitting at the rebol error message | |
Steeve 26-Mar-2010 [16186] | just rename the exe |
BrianH 27-Mar-2010 [16187] | Sysinternals has better ps utilities, which can do a better job of killing process if need be. |
Rebolek 31-Mar-2010 [16188] | I need to do something like this: >> a: context [b: context [c:1]] >> get in a 'b/c == 1 Is there some way to do this? |
Pekr 31-Mar-2010 [16189] | the only chanined solution which comes to my mind is: get in get in a 'b 'c |
Steeve 31-Mar-2010 [16190x2] | having, >> to-path [a b c] == a/b/c you can get it with: >> do to-path append [a] 'b/c == 1 |
>> do head clear change change '_/_ 'a 'b/c == 1 | |
Rebolek 31-Mar-2010 [16192] | Pekr: that's what I need to avoid. |
Ladislav 31-Mar-2010 [16193x2] | >> a: context [b: context [c: 1]] >> do bind [b/c] a == 1 |
is that more like what you want? | |
Steeve 31-Mar-2010 [16195] | haha, you won |
Rebolek 31-Mar-2010 [16196] | Ladislav, exactly! Thanks |
Pekr 31-Mar-2010 [16197] | my line of thoughts was .... hmm, I would somehow have to bind b/c into 'a's context, but .... then I never know, how to use bind :-) Cool solutions, both from Ladislav and Steeve .... |
Ladislav 31-Mar-2010 [16198] | Actually, Pekr, your solution has to be used in some cases in R2, since the support for get-paths is missing |
Pekr 31-Mar-2010 [16199] | I don't know much about it, I just remember that path evaluation has changed with some R2 version - from more to less "aggressive" ... does it for e.g. mean, that with earlier versions of R2, it was possible? |
Rebolek 31-Mar-2010 [16200] | Ok, so now let's make it bit more complicated :) I have the a object and for example >> p: make path! [b c] and I need something like >> do bind [p] a == 1 |
Pekr 31-Mar-2010 [16201] | do bind reduce [p] a |
Steeve 31-Mar-2010 [16202] | or, >> do head insert p 'a |
Pekr 31-Mar-2010 [16203] | :-) ... amazing :-) |
Rebolek 31-Mar-2010 [16204] | (i'm sorry for such a newbie questions, but I'm ill and my brain refuses to work :-) |
Ladislav 31-Mar-2010 [16205x2] | ...does it for e.g. mean, that with earlier versions of R2, it was possible?... - no, it is possible in R3 |
jdishun (and other fans of named functions) - check http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=named-func.r | |
ChristianE 1-Apr-2010 [16207] | That's nice, finally something to point to when that question comes up again. |
Andreas 1-Apr-2010 [16208x4] | ah, those named functions are brilliant |
maybe we should add special handling to bind so that each function is automatically passed a handle to refer to itself | |
we could call it ..... self! | |
/apr1 | |
Ladislav 2-Apr-2010 [16212] | :-D |
BrianH 2-Apr-2010 [16213] | :) |
Gregg 2-Apr-2010 [16214] | NAMED-FUNC is excellent though. A great REBOL example. Thanks for doing that Ladislav. |
Paul 2-Apr-2010 [16215] | Rebolek couldn't you have done this in your first example: >> a/b/c == 1 |
Steeve 2-Apr-2010 [16216] | No no no. It's again the rules. You have to find the weirdest way. |
Paul 2-Apr-2010 [16217] | Ahhh... |
Ashley 3-Apr-2010 [16218] | Is there is better way to code the following idiom: foreach [from to] [ "&" "&" "<" "<" ">" ">" "^/" "<br>" ][ replace/all string from to ] I'm using this much too frequently for my own liking ;) |
Maxim 3-Apr-2010 [16219x2] | there are faster algorythms, if you are managing very large files, but they require a bit more code and/or use of parse. |
still, replace is pretty fast... I don't know if the parse approach will be faster with only 4 items to replace. | |
older newer | first last |