World: r3wp

I haven't come across such a file move function. I guess, you need 
to call the operating system.

You could use write/read then delete

RENAME

if that fails (different filesystems), you need the usual copy + 
delete. (MV does the same.)

I'm puzzled, I could miss that. :-) Thanks, Gabriele!

It's right there in the dictionary, under "Port, File, and IO Functions":
http://www.rebol.com/docs/dictionary.html

Ah, can't be used for what Will is after.!

This function cannot be used to move a file from one directory to 
another. 

Just checked, it correctly moved a text file from one directory to 
another on Ubuntu

from the rename help:
ARGUMENTS:
     old -- path to the old file (Type: file url)
     new -- new name (not a path) (Type: file url string)


but it indeed works if you use a destination path relative to the 
origin path, in my case 0.002 seconds instead of 0.300 using call 
"mv..   thanks all 8-)

why does call have a pretty fixed 300 ms delay? Is it a coincidense 
on my machine or is it enforced somewhere?
timer [call/wait ""]
;   0:00:00.301991

Also on mine under OS X:
>> time [call/wait ""]
== 0:00:00.308834

*Waiting on new process (instead of returning immediately)

*Process must run and end (launching of the shell, shell interprets 
string, etc)
*Process must be reaped
*Possibly other stuff
>> time [call/wait {}] 1
== 0:00:00.300538
>> time [call {}] 1     
== 0:00:00.010613

strange that it's .3s, though

Geomol: i'm not entirely sure why the docs say that, i think it always 
worked for me.

300 ms: maybe there's a hardcoded "wait" for the other process to 
start, or something like that. it seems to be too much consistent 
to just be the shell startup time.

(I think Carl once published the code for CALL... I need to find 
it and have a look.)

300ms is a LOT of time for webapps, it would be really appreciated 
if a build without that limitation could be made available, Thank 
you Gabriele for taking care 8-)

You could use my async-call code :-)

Just quick hello..  I'm totally new to AltME and have used Rebol 
only years ago. I was somewhat active at older mailing list nearly 
ten years ago, but various things happened and Rebol was not among 
top priorities.. since things have changed quite a lot ..

Hello, and welcome!

I hope, you find what you seek here. And don't be afraid to ask, 
there are many nice and helpful people here.

Oh thanks.. I'm not even sure what I seek at the moment, just got 
the feeling I need to check what´s cooking with Rebol these days.

R2 still has a few lingering issues, but development hasn't stopped 
on it. The focus now is on R3, but the community at large is still 
kind of on the sidelines. Carl and a core group are working on key 
elements, including the host interface release and extension model. 
Depending on when you last looked at R2, there may be some new things 
there for you to find as well.

I did DL R3 and run the gfx-view Demo on it. Looks really nice,  
for example fonts seem to render much better than on REBOL/View 2.7.6.3.1 
-- for some reason this seems to mess especially badly with bolded 
characters.

The UI is far from done, though.

Ah well. I found the reason for one big cosmetical issue with this 
2.7.6 ...  It has been documented with solution at: http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=4004&
    I would like to point out one detail missing from that RAMBO; 
font smooth type change requires system restart to be effective.

This is not likely to be fixed. REBOL 2.7.x low level systems are 
probably not maintained anymore.

Well.. It's not a biggie. Was just something a noob wanting to evalluate 
Rebol might miss.  :-)


Also I finally found a way to make text bigger on AltME window.. 
With today´s screens the default is a bit smallish.

Yeah, R2 isn't great for creating "slick" interfaces without the 
use of graphics. Use can draw text with anti-alias, but most scripts 
just do things the easy way.


The pencil icon is handy as well, so you can use ctrl+s to send. 
I imagine you've already done that, but for others listening in...

Hello again all,  I'm BrianD (but be glad that's not my alias or 
it would make the Wiki back-and-forth with BrianH even harder to 
read).

I was introduced to Rebol a couple of years ago to look at a codebase 
written in it, and to address the first bug I found in that codebase 
I decided to see "what it would take" to write an enumerated type: 
http://hostilefork.com/2009/06/13/enumerated-type-for-rebol2/

Earlier this year I started a project to take every single scrap 
of idea that I'd ever had or project I'd started and push it to some 
state of completion.  So I tripped across that code, and decided 
to clean it up and submit it to the rebol code archive.

I got the help to make the enum work out here, on AltME, from some 
of you -- you may remember that.

But in the interim I'd lost my AltME password, and Rebol's community 
had become something of a moving target anyway.  So I looked at R3 
chat.

So I am new, and I am also not that new.  I'd like to propose that 
Rebol embrace visibility in new mediums, like StackOverflow.  Anyone 
with an RSS reader might want to subscribe to the latest Rebol-related 
questions: http://stackoverflow.com/feeds/tag?tagnames=rebol&sort=newest

cough cough ...

Someone posting rebol questions has been accused of spaming ...

Well, he wrote a lot, but there are still only 80.

[Pehaps this discussion belongs more naturally in the Advocacy group, 
rather than a newcomers' questions group]

I'll talk wherever.  But I was just going to speak about preferred 
mediums of communication.  Carl has his, I have mine, y'all have 
yours, etc.

And my favorite is wiki.  Now here we are -- you want to recategorize. 
 How do you?

Personally i think we need more web boards ... and not this dark 
net stuff

moving to Chat, I guess?

or ~humor

One thing that I noticed (an obviously *doh* moment) is that it's 
hard not to accidently start trying to reinvent the wheel with Rebol 
programs. There are so many excellent tools, utilities, and games 
allready made..  Question is more ofthem than not, where do I find 
what´s been made, how well it´s been kept updates etc.?

joanna - the best aproach is to probably ask here. We have few old-time 
rebollers here, who might remember some gems. One of them being me 
for e.g. OTOH - sometimes I am surprised, I can find real gems in 
rebol.org archive. So - rebol.org, google, ask on mailing list or 
here on AltME ...

Thanks, I´ll do so when I have something spesific in mind..  I was 
wondering how much Rebol has changed in last 10 or so years, in a 
sense that If I find an neat script what are chances it still works 
as it´s shoudl be.  At the moment I have this feeling that this current 
v2 Rebol shoudl be bit more compatible than upcoming V3 ?

R3 is not very compatible with R2

most R2 script will work unchanged. There were, however, some changes 
to VID over time, so older VID scripts might not work with newer 
VID (View) engines. As for R2 to R3, Henrik is right - most scripts 
will not work ...

...most script will not work...
 - an uninformed and unsourced opinion