World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Henrik 5-Nov-2009 [19404] | -4.0 in OSX A94. |
Maxim 5-Nov-2009 [19405] | mine was on XP |
Sunanda 5-Nov-2009 [19406] | -4.0 .....A94, Windows Vista |
Tomc 5-Nov-2009 [19407x5] | hmmm ...should not underflow and underflow should be reported. |
it is the same back in r2 on solais & windows | |
2^48 is as high as I can go on a 32 bit windows intel before abundant underflows and only 2^ 49 on a 64 bit solaris sparc . Does R3 use the entire width of the available processor? | |
I realize these are decimal aproximations (at least on the 32 bit machine) but rebols mod function returns decimals for example mod (PI + 50.0) 10 . why would these aproximated large values not come back as their nearest decimal aproximations if t | |
.. if that is the problem | |
Maxim 5-Nov-2009 [19412] | is this a common IEEE floating point issue? |
Tomc 5-Nov-2009 [19413] | I could see that being the case on a 32 bit machine but not one with an exact representation |
Maxim 5-Nov-2009 [19414x2] | you should create a curecode ticket and discuss this with Carl. AFAIK he is savy about this stuff, so you could help him improve this if at all possible :-) |
he takes curecode VERY seriously. and it will act as a databank of info however this turns out, for future reference. | |
Tomc 5-Nov-2009 [19416] | standard significand for iEEE single precision is 24 bits so yes it is likely related to double precision behavior |
Geomol 5-Nov-2009 [19417] | I haven't got time to dig in deeper right now, but remember, there are many MOD functions: MOD, REMAINDER, MODULO, // Other? |
Tomc 5-Nov-2009 [19418x2] | origanally there was just mod I may have assumed the rest were alias' |
modulo is a wrapper around mod to make the result pretty in some cases | |
Pekr 5-Nov-2009 [19420] | by re-reading some of Max ideas about draw, View, etc., I now think that deeper change is needed. Gobs sound so old-school by his propositions .... |
Mchean 5-Nov-2009 [19421] | anyone got a rebol 3 icon for the desktop? |
Pekr 5-Nov-2009 [19422] | not yet ... |
Mchean 5-Nov-2009 [19423x2] | yeah, it's not a priority, but i moved the shortcut to my desktop |
so... :) | |
Pekr 5-Nov-2009 [19425] | some ideas from hostilefork - http://hostilefork.com/shared/rebol/rebol_rebooted_3d.png |
Henrik 5-Nov-2009 [19426] | http://www.rebol.com/consulting.html |
amacleod 5-Nov-2009 [19427] | Wher does he find the time? |
Maxim 5-Nov-2009 [19428] | maybe its the return of REBOL as a team instead of a one man show? like its used to be in the golden days of rebol 1.x ahh Bo, was such a cool guy at support :-D |
BrianH 6-Nov-2009 [19429x2] | Maxim, did you notice the link Henrik posted? The days of the one man show are over :) |
Sorry, you were commenting on the link :) Yes, it's the return of the team. | |
Pekr 7-Nov-2009 [19431] | Protect with Path targets - http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0292.html |
Steeve 7-Nov-2009 [19432x2] | Some understandings. What Rebol is doing when a serie is growing. ? We know Rebol expands them, but following what scheme ? I made some tests and saw really strange things. Starting with an empty string and adding 32 * 1024 chars, I listed when the string is expanded. >>8 16 48 112 240 512 2048 8192 32768 Meaning, when adding the eigth char, the string is expanded to fit 15 chars. It makes sense, because the size of a cell in memory is 16 bytes. So, in the first cell, only 7 chars can be stored (remember, in R3 a char takes 2 bytes) Why 7 chars and not 8 ? Because a string is terminated with the (null) char. Another things we can see is that more a serie is large, more the reserved cells are numerous when an expansion occurs. It's a little frightening because we don't control very well the expansion in memory. Now say, we're starting with a string of 8191 length. >> 8192 16384 ... By, just adding one more char in it, my tests show it will double the whole size of the string in memory. Is that not too much ? Don't know... |
hum, i think i'm wrong somewhere, need more tests.... | |
Geomol 7-Nov-2009 [19434] | I feel, it's a common thing to double sizes of series, when they grow. Lua does it too. |
Gabriele 8-Nov-2009 [19435x3] | Steeve, it is not true that a char takes 2 bytes. That depends on the content of the string. |
it is common practice to grow exponentially like REBOL does. it greatly limits the nuber of allocations and copies that need to be done. | |
Of course, there is a limit, after which the series is grown linearly. I don't remember what the limit is. | |
Steeve 8-Nov-2009 [19438x2] | At least something is usefull to know. Never initialize the length of an empty serie with a power of 2, because twice this length could be really allocated (really annoying for large series). Instead, reduce the length of 1. ie. make string! 8 * 1024 (actually, allocates 16 KB, not 8KB) Instead i will do: make string! 8 * 1024 - 1 (allocates 8KB, not more) |
Seems that stats/show give hints about the scheme used for expansions. 8B 16B 32B 48B 64B 80B 96B ... But sometimes, some pools are skipped. Pool[ 0] 8B 792/ 1024: 256 (77%) 4 segs, 8224 total Pool[ 1] 16B 428/ 512: 256 (83%) 2 segs, 8208 total Pool[ 2] 32B 1663/ 2048: 512 (81%) 4 segs, 65568 total Pool[ 3] 48B 2656/ 3072:1024 (86%) 3 segs, 147480 total Pool[ 4] 64B 2226/ 2560: 512 (86%) 5 segs, 163880 total Pool[ 5] 80B 962/ 1024: 256 (93%) 4 segs, 81952 total Pool[ 6] 96B 467/ 512: 128 (91%) 4 segs, 49184 total Pool[ 7] 112B 329/ 384: 128 (85%) 3 segs, 43032 total Pool[ 8] 128B 250/ 256: 64 (97%) 4 segs, 32800 total Pool[ 9] 144B 203/ 256: 64 (79%) 4 segs, 36896 total Pool[10] 160B 163/ 192: 64 (84%) 3 segs, 30744 total Pool[11] 176B 109/ 128: 32 (85%) 4 segs, 22560 total Pool[12] 192B 83/ 96: 32 (86%) 3 segs, 18456 total Pool[13] 208B 78/ 96: 32 (81%) 3 segs, 19992 total Pool[14] 224B 85/ 96: 32 (88%) 3 segs, 21528 total Pool[15] 240B 58/ 64: 32 (90%) 2 segs, 15376 total Pool[16] 256B 37/ 64: 64 (57%) 1 segs, 16392 total Pool[17] 320B 132/ 160: 32 (82%) 5 segs, 51240 total Pool[18] 384B 68/ 80: 16 (85%) 5 segs, 30760 total Pool[19] 448B 31/ 32: 16 (96%) 2 segs, 14352 total Pool[20] 512B 23/ 24: 8 (95%) 3 segs, 12312 total Pool[21] 1024B 62/ 64: 16 (96%) 4 segs, 65568 total Pool[22] 2048B 11/ 16: 8 (68%) 2 segs, 32784 total Pool[23] 3072B 2/ 8: 4 (25%) 2 segs, 24592 total Pool[24] 4096B 0/ 0: 4 ( 0%) 0 segs, 0 total Pool[25] 20B 10934/12288:4096 (88%) 3 segs, 245784 total Pool[26] 64B 1/ 128: 128 ( 0%) 1 segs, 8200 total | |
Pekr 8-Nov-2009 [19440x3] | Hmm, according to Carl's comment in following blog comment section, it seems we are not going to get SSL in an easy way, unless someone from community does it :-( .... that is bad, as it might never come .... http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/r3blog.r?view=0290#comments |
But maybe some networkin guru will appear here, and will pick-up, where Holger left :-) | |
Followup on R3 marketing - http://reboltutorial.com/blog/marketing-sits-above-strategy/ | |
PeterWood 8-Nov-2009 [19443] | It will be a shame if Rebol3 doesn't support SSL. I think Rebol's buitlt-in network features such as the HTTP:// and Mail:// schemes used to be a big attraction. I think that not supporting them properly in R3, being able to read and write Gmail for example, is like shooting yourself in the foot from a marketing perspective. |
amacleod 8-Nov-2009 [19444] | Agreed, not being able to access GMail out of the box is a real negative... |
BrianH 8-Nov-2009 [19445x2] | Yes, that would be bad. Fortunately the relevant will be in the open source portion of R3, so it shouldn't be too difficult for the community to add. R3 is a community project, remember. |
The Putty SSL code is supposed to be good and tiny, so we cold adapt that. | |
Pekr 8-Nov-2009 [19447] | I would still expect such fundamental feature to be delivered by RT. |
BrianH 8-Nov-2009 [19448x2] | Community project, partially open source, and what you are talking about is in the open source portion. Volunteers? Contributions? |
Do you think Python magically got SSL support? Nope, someone contributed it. | |
Henrik 8-Nov-2009 [19450] | Being an open source part, implemented by a third party, doesn't mean it's not "delivered by RT" as seen from the user's perspective. |
BrianH 8-Nov-2009 [19451x3] | I think people are still thinking of R3 based on the situation with R2. With R2 if something wasn't "delivered by RT", you couldn't do it at all in some (lower-level) cases. This is simply not true with R3. R3 is not a black box, and SSL in particular would be easy to retrofit even if the base distribution doesn't include it. Plus, the pace of development of R3 is pretty fast, and any release that doesn't have the feature you want could be followed pretty quickly with a release that includes it. The only limitation is time, effort, and money (to buy the other two). If people don't contribute, it doesn't get done, period. If you want the feature, add it yourself or pay someone to write it. Adding it yourself will be easy in this case - we'll see about how easy the other method will be. |
implemented by a third party - this is just wrong. In a community project, anyone in the community is a first party. The only third-parties are the ones who don't contribute. | |
I'm a little surprised to hear this from you two, Pekr and Henrik, since both of you *do* contribute quite a lot. Good work, guys :) | |
older newer | first last |