World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Pekr 18-Nov-2009 [19709] | hmm, there is a 'delimit function ... it seems to be renamed to 'split .... |
Chris 18-Nov-2009 [19710x2] | 'dehex does not work as I'd anticpated: dehex "em%E2%80%94dash" ; s/b "em--dash" (where -- is em-dash) |
More like: dehex: use [hx ch][ hx: charset [#"0" - #"9" #"a" - #"f" #"A" - #"F"] func [text][ parse/all text: to-binary text [ any [ to #"%" remove [#"%" copy ch 2 hx] ; change <> remove insert (ch: debase/base ch 16) insert ch ] to end ] to-string text ] ] | |
Jerry 18-Nov-2009 [19712] | I need a map! with 60'000'000 entries. But in R3, I cannot do that: >> make map! 500'000 ** Script error: maximum limit reached: 500000 Why the limit is so small? |
Pekr 18-Nov-2009 [19713x2] | CC it, please ... |
I think that some things are settable, via enchant or so function, e.g. stack size, but not sure ... | |
Jerry 18-Nov-2009 [19715] | Ok, I will CC it. |
Paul 18-Nov-2009 [19716] | Thanks Brian, I'll try to look up the discussions regarding DELMIT tonight if I have some time. |
Henrik 18-Nov-2009 [19717] | This: parse "this, simple, csv, string" "," I believe was meant to be removed, because it's too obscure. I think the intended function for this is SPLIT. |
Paul 18-Nov-2009 [19718] | I didn't know that. |
Henrik 18-Nov-2009 [19719] | I don't know if it has been removed yet or if that will be a 3.1 feature. |
Arie 18-Nov-2009 [19720] | Back to my question (a long time ago :-) May I assume that the behaviour I wrote about in my question is a bug? A probe works, but anyhow the window won't move anymore. |
Henrik 18-Nov-2009 [19721x2] | what happens if you change show-later to show? |
seems host code work is now continuing. Something with a MinGW C target. | |
Jerry 18-Nov-2009 [19723] | how can I remove an entry from a map! in R3? BTW, I use string! (not word!) as index here, so I cannot just say: my-map/my-word: none |
btiffin 18-Nov-2009 [19724x2] | Geomol; I have to go with Gregg on this one. I'd much rather have to deal with grenade close on output than NOT seeing your for example fire true on the if i = 6.0. Is that attitude good for REBOL or rocket science? Perhaps not. Small business owner/hobbyist? Yep. In my humble, liable to blow up rockets, opinion. |
oops, didn't notice how far back the scroll bar was... "this one" being the post re decimal! with base 2 conversion precision. this line in particular. for i 4.0 6.0 0.1 [print i if i = 6.0 [print [i "= 6.0"]]]f | |
Izkata 18-Nov-2009 [19726] | Jerry: try my-map/( my-string ): none |
Jerry 19-Nov-2009 [19727] | thanks Izkata |
Geomol 19-Nov-2009 [19728x4] | btiffin, did you notice, that the i = 7.0 test in my other example fails? Try: for i 4.0 7.0 0.1 [print i if i = 7.0 [print [i "= 7.0"]]] The problem is, that you can make examples, where the "nearness" works. So the small business owner/hobbyist will come to think, the language actually handle those base-2 precision problems, but it doesn't. The only way, as I see it, to really handle this problem is by using true decimal arithmetic (e.g. some kind of binary-coded decimal as in money!). I believe, the current behaviour will only lead to more confusion. |
How will you explain this behaviour to someone learning how to program? >> 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 = 0.3 == true >> 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 > 0.3 == true I can explain this next behaviour, even it seems illogical at first: >> 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 == 0.3 == false >> 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 > 0.3 == true | |
even *if* it seems ... | |
Do or do not... there is no try. REBOL try to solve the base-2 precision problem. | |
Arie 19-Nov-2009 [19732x2] | Henrik: the behaviour is the same when I use show instead of show-later. |
For the record; I am using: Windows XP Pro SP3 Rebol3 2.100.94.3.1 GUI 0.2.1 | |
Henrik 19-Nov-2009 [19734] | arie, ok. I don't have a solution, but this needs to be looked into once GUI work continues. While the Core of R3 has moved forward a lot, GUI has not moved in the past year. it could be that a feature is broken in the GUI now because of this. |
Ladislav 19-Nov-2009 [19735] | >> 0.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 > 0.3 - this differs from the behaviour in R2, maybe an error? |
Geomol 19-Nov-2009 [19736x2] | If you change it, then you'll have problem with < > and ==, because you can have situations, where all those 3 return false. |
Then you can add strict-lesser? and strict-greater?, but I wouldn't recommend it. :-) | |
Chris 19-Nov-2009 [19738] | R2 difference: R2 >> join url:: "%23" == url::%23 R3 >> join url:: "%23" == url::%2523 |
Geomol 19-Nov-2009 [19739x2] | The "%" is encoded as "%25" for urls in R3, which is correct, I think. >> to char! #"^(25)" == #"%" |
See e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding#Percent-encoding_reserved_characters | |
Chris 19-Nov-2009 [19741x2] | This isn't helpful either: >> load join "url::" "%23" == url::# |
I know, but my string is already percent encoded... | |
Geomol 19-Nov-2009 [19743] | ah |
Maxim 19-Nov-2009 [19744x2] | but your string is not a url, its a string. |
the string should be the decoded value of the url. | |
Chris 19-Nov-2009 [19746x4] | If it did a full url-encode, that'd be good, but it doesn't. |
Just percent encoding, of the percent symbol. | |
Is this is a bug? - url::%23 and url::# are not the same: >> url::%23 == url::# | |
Blocked either way: >> qs: to-webform [q "&=#"] == "q=%26%3D%23" >> join url:: qs == url::q=%2526%253D%2523 >> load join "url::" qs == url::q=&=# | |
Arie 19-Nov-2009 [19750] | Henrik: OK. Thanks! |
BrianH 19-Nov-2009 [19751x2] | I've been looking over R3's url handling and decoding and it needs more work, some of which needs to be in the native syntax. |
Chris, url::%23 and url::# should not be the same. The purpose of percent encoding is to allow you to specify character values without them being treated as syntax. If you specify a # directly in an http url, for instance, it should be taken as the start of the anchor portion of the url. If you percent encode it, it shouldn't be an anchor. | |
Chris 19-Nov-2009 [19753x4] | Yep, hence the so far insurmountable problem I have. |
Even tried the equivalent of - read decode-url "uri::%23" - but somewhere it gets encoded again to %2523, not sure if that's specific to the http scheme implementation? I haven't dug enough. | |
Is there a reason why it should decode any percent encoded character on loading? | |
Here's the offender - how to make this work? -- http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23REBOL | |
Gabriele 20-Nov-2009 [19757] | Chris: I have pointed out this flaw to Carl before R3 was started, and provided the correct code to handle URI according to the standards... |
Henrik 20-Nov-2009 [19758] | Is it in curecode? |
older newer | first last |