World: r3wp
[Core] Discuss core issues
older newer | first last |
Sunanda 5-Oct-2006 [5498] | 1.2.1 and early do give an error in this case. So, at the very least., its an undocumented change of behaviour. |
Henrik 5-Oct-2006 [5499] | RAMBO it? |
Rebolek 5-Oct-2006 [5500] | Ladislav I expected error! but I'm not sure about that |
Gabriele 5-Oct-2006 [5501x3] | >> to decimal! "" ** Script Error: Invalid argument: ** Near: to decimal! "" |
one of the two needs to be changed. :) | |
(i believe this is in rambo already, you should do a search first) | |
Anton 5-Oct-2006 [5504] | I think I prefer the error. |
Maxim 5-Oct-2006 [5505x2] | this is where as-integer and as-decimal make sense IMHO. return the most logical representation of supplied value, with a defined fall back when no sense can be made of input. |
but the rules must be clearly documented, in any case. | |
Rebolek 6-Oct-2006 [5507] | The bug is in RAMBO (RAMBO Ticket #3928) for 352 days. Seems hard to fix ;) |
Gabriele 6-Oct-2006 [5508] | if you guys think it should have a higher priority, i can raise it. |
Rebolek 6-Oct-2006 [5509] | It will be good to know what is typical longevity of bugs according to their priority. |
Henrik 6-Oct-2006 [5510] | Ladislav posted on 18. sep.: do you like this: any [1 true] ; == 1 ? I have a variant: any [false none] ; == none Would it make more sense to return FALSE? It seems to me that FALSE should have precedence over NONE. |
Gregg 6-Oct-2006 [5511] | False and none are treated the same in many cases, so I think it's fine the way it is; otherwise you have to consider all the other cases as well. |
Henrik 6-Oct-2006 [5512] | well: pick [do-this do-that] false ; == does 'do-that pick [do-this do-that] none ; == error This came from a function where I had a refinement: f: func [/act] [ pick [do-this do-that] act ] You can't do that, since /act is none. Sure you can then use EITHER, if do-this and do-that are not necessarily in one block, but you couldn't extend the existing code with: >> pick [do-this do-that] any [act false] ; == still none, which gives error So you have to use something less clean like: >> pick [do-this do-that] any [act 2] |
Rebolek 6-Oct-2006 [5513] | you can do >>pick [do-this do-that] found? any] |
Ladislav 6-Oct-2006 [5514] | I pulled out the question, sorry, it was a misread at my side |
Rebolek 6-Oct-2006 [5515] | argh, again: >>pick [do-this do-that] found? act |
Ladislav 6-Oct-2006 [5516] | I am content with it as it is |
Henrik 6-Oct-2006 [5517] | rebolek, thanks. as long as there is a way to discern between none and false with one function |
Ladislav 6-Oct-2006 [5518] | some interesting block "quirks": block1: #[block! [a b] -1] none block2: #[block! [a b] 4] none mold/all block1 ; == "#[block![a b]-1]" mold/all block2 ; == "#[block![a b]4]" index? block1 ; == -1 index? block2 ; == 3 length? block1 ; == 4 length? block2 ; == 0 |
Maxim 6-Oct-2006 [5519x2] | all and any are extremely capable as they are. and I don't see why they should change. all and any are NOT boolean operations, they are program flow just like if and either. |
'ANY on returns a non false or non none value. it does not return such a value from the block itself. if you specify only none and false value, it effectively assumes all is bad and returns none. 'ALL is the same, but will only return a value unless one value equates to false or none (in which case it considers the block a failure and returns its own value, not the value from the block itself). | |
Robert 9-Oct-2006 [5521] | Gab, the same applies for: This doesn't look very consisten to me: >> to-integer none == 0 >> to-decimal none ** Script Error: Invalid argument: none ** Where: to-decimal ** Near: to decimal! :value |
Gabriele 9-Oct-2006 [5522] | yes, i agree. i think other cases like that have been pointed out in the past. |
Ladislav 9-Oct-2006 [5523x2] | I don't know how INDEX?/XY works. Help, please. |
(is it meant for IMAGE! datatype?) | |
Rebolek 9-Oct-2006 [5525] | Ladislav: it seems so: >> n: make image! 100x100 == make image! [100x100 #{ 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... >> n: skip n 300 == make image! [100x100 #{ 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... >> index?/xy n == 0x3 |
Ladislav 9-Oct-2006 [5526] | thanks |
Rebolek 9-Oct-2006 [5527] | I'm curious, if there's also some function for setting position in image! - something like AT/xy |
Anton 9-Oct-2006 [5528] | There is: >> at logo.gif 12x10 == make image! [100x24 #{ 7C7C7CF5F5F5FEFEFEFEFEFEB5B5B5020202020202020202020202020202 020202020202BDBDBDFEFEFEFEFEFEF5F5F5A5A5A59B... |
Rebolek 9-Oct-2006 [5529] | Ah, thanks >> index?/xy at logo.gif 12x10 == 12x10 |
Louis 9-Oct-2006 [5530] | mail: read pop://user:[pass-:-mail-:-example-:-com] How should the above line be written when the user name is an email address? |
PeterWood 9-Oct-2006 [5531x2] | You should find the answer here: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-topic-index.r?i=mail |
or here: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-thread.r?m=rmlFSJQ | |
Louis 10-Oct-2006 [5533x2] | Thank you, Peter! |
Problem: no matter which email client I use, only 8 emails can be downloaded. On the 9th email the client locks up. What can I do about this? I am expecting some very important email. | |
PeterWood 10-Oct-2006 [5535x3] | Try dowloading DideC's excellent delete-mail program - http://membres.lycos.fr/didec/rebsite/delete-emails/delete-emails3.0.0.html |
It will let you look at the headers of the mail in your mailserver's inbox. | |
You can delete messages that are causing problems before you dowload them. | |
Louis 10-Oct-2006 [5538] | Thanks, Peter. I'll try that and let you know what happens. |
PeterWood 10-Oct-2006 [5539] | There''s a more up-to-date version at http://membres.lycos.fr/didec/rebsite/delete-emails/delete-emails.r |
Louis 10-Oct-2006 [5540x7] | Some code is missing in DideC's script. |
Whoops. Didn't see your post in time. | |
Error message says the site might be down. | |
No. It opens now. | |
I'm not having much sucess today. I downloaded it, but it dies instantly when I try to fetch my mail. Erro Signature AppName: rebol.exe AppVer: 1.3.2.3 ModName: rebol.exe ModVer: 1.3.2.3 Offset: 00031983 | |
That is a windows error message, and just the first part of it. | |
Is that script working for anyone else? I mean that version of the script? | |
PeterWood 10-Oct-2006 [5547] | I run version 3.1.1 with Rebol 1.2.10 |
older newer | first last |