World: r3wp

Help, help!

Well, I'm not exactly new... but I never before had noticed thisone:

A hidden field is showed when get focus...

I mean:

view layout	[
    across
    lbl "field 1" f1: field return
    lbl "field 2" f2: field return
    btn "hide f2" [hide f2]
]

hide the second field by pressing the button, then go to the first 
field
and press enter, and the second field is showed again with focus.

I hope there is a simple way to void hidden objects get focus.

someone can help me?

It's a known issue: http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=3477&

I don't know if someone has a fix out there or not. You might try:

	deflag-face f2 'tabbed

Thanks for the quick answer Gregg!

I see the problem is also for XP not only for linux... 


I tried with 1.2.8 and newers all XP included yesterday betas. All 
the same.

Man, your code works!, thanks a lot!!

Glad it helped!

me too :-)

A simple patch would be to had the test of 'show? in ctx-text/next-field 
and ctx-text-backfield.

had = add

ctx-text/next-field: func [face /local item][
    all [
        item: find face/parent-face/pane face 
        while [
            if tail? item: next item [item: head item] 
            face <> first item
        ] [

            if all [object? item/1 flag-face? item/1 tabbed item/1/show?] [return 
            item/1]    ;<==== I  ADDED IT HERE
        ]
    ] 
    none
]

RAMBO masters: if one can add this correction to the Rambo entry.

Now that's Cool

We did not get it in time. :(  -- But let's make sure not to miss 
it on the 1.3.1 release.

I don't particularly understand, what does it mean, Carl. Who does 
set your timeframes? So you do prefer releasing non-fully-fixed 1.3 
"in time", instead of fixing known issues first, and releasing e.g. 
few days later? That simply does not make sense ..

If Carl delays the release until the last bug is reported and fixed, 
it'll *never* be released. ;)

Agree, get it out there now.

Real Artists Ship
 - Steve Jobs

There is no such thing as "fully fixed" software. :-) 


There are many many many things on the list that didn't get in, and 
even a little change like this--which may seem safe and easy--means 
more testing and inspection, often a lot more than you expect. 


In this case, let's look at how many people are screaming that this 
particular issue is killing their apps; not many; it's been around 
a while. Let's also look at whether we can work around it even if 
1.3 doesn't fix it; yes we can, and without too much trouble it seems. 
So, as one person hammering on RT to ship 1.3, I'd vote to ship without 
it.

Gregg - I am not talking about one particular issue mentioned above, 
more about installer etc. issues. You should distinguish between 
a bug fix importances, as if Installer is not solved in a good way, 
it can annoy many ppl!

Yes, I think we all agree Petr; it's a balancing act. Carl is *very* 
aware of the importance of these things, but also knows that "shipping 
is a feature".

Consider: The installer is run once per version, and the only problems 
left in its function are the location of registry entries that aren't 
visible from View anyway. The problems that affect day-to-day View 
operation have been fixed with the use of a seperate sandbox directory. 
The rest can be fixed in later versions with automagic migration 
code and no REBOL scripts would know the difference. Once installed, 
View can be used in a multiuser environment now (as of 1.2.117); 
we can make the installer multiuser-safe later.

The installer works properly for single-user installations right 
now (as of 1.2.117).

I mean in terms of leaving View in a workable state - internal installer 
functionality has been fixed somewhat since then.

Installer aproach is imo incorrect and I will post my findings

Please do, although perhaps the Debug p1.3 or View group might be 
better for that :)

ok, now I am glad Gregg provided new group for that, so I will move 
and post my observations in new Installer group ...

I am trying to add a newline to separate blocks of hashs I add to 
a file withe the save command.

[idkey: 1 objectname: "article" creator: "Lec, Norm" fulltitle: "Title 
1" pageread: "1"] {#"^^/"} [idkey: 2 objectname: "article" ...
with the line: append bib mold/all newline

Unfortunately I dont find the way to dispose the blocks in a pleasing 
format because the newline separating them is in source format.

I did try a dozen of combination with reduce, form mold and compose 
and the various newline forms I know ^/ "^/" but to no avail.

It shure is stupid but I am stock with this.  If I use write I am 
OK, but would like to learn the trick with save. Thanks.

In last View version (1.3.x) and last Core, there is a 'new-line 
function to format a block in lines. I think it does not work on 
hash! (just try), but you can use 'to-block on your hash! to be able 
to use it.

>> help new-line
USAGE:
    NEW-LINE block value /all /skip size

DESCRIPTION:
     Sets or clears the new-line marker within a block.
     NEW-LINE is a native value.

ARGUMENTS:
     block -- Position in block to change marker (Type: block)
     value -- Set TRUE for newline. (Type: any)

REFINEMENTS:
     /all -- Set/clear marker to end of block

     /skip -- Set/clear marker periodically to the end of the block
         size -- (Type: integer)
>> a: [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10]
== [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10]
>> new-line a true
== [
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
]
>> new-line a false
== [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10]
>> new-line/skip a true 2
== [
    1 2
    3 4
    5 6
    7 8
    9 10
]

Thanks, I shure missed that one.

It's a new feature and it's not currently documented, just mentioned 
in the View 1.3 change log page.

http://www.rebol.net/article/0059.html

Hello all.. I need help!  I am trying to append a series within a 
series..  i.e.  [ [a b c] [d e f] ].  How would I add [g h i] to 
the end of my series so that I would have [ [abc] [ d e f] [g h i] 
], and not [ [a b c] [d e f] g h i ] ?

append/only [ [a b c] [d e f] ] [g h i]

sweet.

How to make this work?

>> foreach line read/lines request-file [prin "before " prin line 
print " after"]

** Access Error: Invalid port spec: /C/Documents and Settings/meta/Desktop/node_list.txt
** Where: halt-view

** Near: foreach line read/lines request-file [prin "before " prin 
line print " after"]
>>

I'm trying to read each line from a file and add something before 
and after

thanks

foreach line read/lines (to-file request-file) [prin "before " prin 
line print " after"]

The to-file converts the response of request-file to the file! datatype 
which read/lines is expecting. The () are needed to ensure that the 
result of to-file is used as the argument

I'm pressed for time. I'm sure others will correct / amend my explanation..

>> request-file
== [%/C/Izkata/Rebol/bay.jpg %/C/Izkata/Rebol/palms.jpg]
>> request-file/only
== %/C/Izkata/Rebol/palms.jpg

This might be better to keep anyone from choosing multiple files:

foreach line read/lines request-file/only [print ["before " line 
" after"]]

thanks guys
Allen it seems the ( ) are not necessary.

Hello everyone,

I have an EditME me that I'm using to manage a project this summer. 
I would like to use Rebol to logon to my wiki, edit some pages and 
attach files to pages.

Are their any code exemples that I could use to understand how to 
go about this. I need to be able to fill in forms and send them in 
to my wiki. 
many thanks

Is there something similar to Python format string in Rebol?

Have you read the CGI how tos?

http://www.rebol.com/docs/cgi1.htmland    http://www.rebol.com/docs/cgi2.html

after those, the RBBS project does some dynamic pages generated from 
databases and key values http://www.rebol.com/docs/cgi-bbs.html
  HOWEVER, when delving into anything CGI (not wiki link, so maybe 
not what you want) it takes some heavy head-scratching

There is no PRINTF-like function in REBOL right now. Eric Long wrote 
one which should be available somewhere (or write to me privately). 
RT has mentioned it more than once; the hard part will be designing 
the interface to it. I wouldn't want a standard FORMAT function to 
work like PRINTF myself, but I think it would be good if there was 
one out there for pople to use who wanted it.