World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Pekr 24-Jul-2007 [3640] | the most difficult part will to attract new developers, being able to extend native (C level) code base ... |
Geomol 24-Jul-2007 [3641x2] | I think, we should read it as: at of 6-Jul-2007, the beta was delayed a couple of weeks. I have a feeling, there is being hard work going on, but it could be delayed yet more. We'll have to wait and see. |
Personally I like the things in there to be robust better than having tons of features. | |
Henrik 24-Jul-2007 [3643] | Geomol, yes, people are working very hard. I wouldn't consider the delays as anything to worry about if the dates were not published. There are no setbacks or things that have failed or strong disagreements or detours into "ohh, shiny!" land. :-) It just needs to take the time it needs to be finished. |
Pekr 24-Jul-2007 [3644] | I don't mind about dealys either, as much as R3 is as cool as I think it is going to be ... |
Geomol 24-Jul-2007 [3645] | Maybe we should send a message to Carl, that he'll receive a present, when R3 is out? As a carrot! ;-) |
Pekr 24-Jul-2007 [3646x2] | btw - Python is going to get 3.0 version too, release mid 2008, and Guido says it will break many code. So our schedule is still ok, although Python is already ahead in some areas ... |
Carrot? So are we going to call a release Rabbit? :-) Knoc knoc, Neo ... and Neo sees rebol console on his monitor :-) | |
Henrik 24-Jul-2007 [3648] | Geomol, well, hehe, to me R3 seems to be like a painting. When exactly is it done? :-) |
Gregg 24-Jul-2007 [3649x2] | John, READD would probaly be called SUM. |
Question: How useful would you find the following, and what other aggregate funcs would you find most useful? fold: func [ block [any-block!] "Block of values" accum "Accumulator value" f [any-function!] "Function to apply" ][ foreach val block [accum: f :accum :val] ] sum: func [block [any-block!]] [fold block 0 :add] product: func [block [any-block!]] [fold block 1 :multiply] average: func [block [any-block!]][ if empty? block [return none] divide sum block length? block ] | |
Gabriele 24-Jul-2007 [3651x4] | geomol, that kind of function is called FOLD, and we're hoping to have it as a mezz in R3. |
our deadline is August 1st. of course, it's not impossible for us to miss it, but we don't want to miss it. (Henrik, Carl is quiet because he's away.) | |
ah, i see gregg has posted fold already :) | |
and, please remember that august 1st is our internal deadline, not a public statement. so, there has been no announcement about the beta being august 1st. i hope it will be around that date because that is our deadline. only Carl makes official announcements, unless noted otherwise. :) | |
Geomol 24-Jul-2007 [3655x4] | What is best? To have new functions like SUM, PRODUCT, etc. or having already present functions operate on blocks also? One big force of REBOL is the datatypes, so isn't the second option the best? |
Is there a theoretical difference between FOLD and MAP? | |
If you choose new functions like SUM, someone might argue, that JOIN with a block as second argument should be another function taking only one argument: JOINALL ["a" "b" 2] or REJOIN (that we have) if the block should be reduced. | |
I guess, it comes down to temperement and programming style. Expanding existing functions would mean: add 4 [1 2 3 5] adding new functions could give: sum [1 2 3 4 5] New functions means more words to learn and remember. Benefit is, that it's maybe easier to read the code. hm | |
Gregg 24-Jul-2007 [3659x2] | SUM is a standard term, and a common aggregate func. It could be a shortcut for "add number block". Generally, I like the idea of "overloading" funcs to make them smarter, e.g. a dialected version of EXTRACT is high on my list, but it's a fine line, and each choice has to be made carefully. |
FOLD vs MAP - FOLD accumulates, while MAP applys the func and returns a series of results. | |
Will 24-Jul-2007 [3661] | I find 'collect very usefull lately,thanks for that 8-) will it be part of R3? |
Gregg 25-Jul-2007 [3662] | :-) We can hope. |
Gabriele 25-Jul-2007 [3663x3] | i'm secretly using it in vid proto so to make the chances of it being in higher ;) |
geomol: the problem is, that there are at least two things that add 4 [1 2 3] could do. and, i think the most "natural" would be for it to result in [5 6 7]. | |
also, FOLD is a generic construct, as opposed to having special handling in all the natives. | |
Pekr 25-Jul-2007 [3666] | Gabriele - how goes VID prototyping? What is its status? :-) |
Geomol 25-Jul-2007 [3667] | Gabriele, good point with ADD! |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3668] | pekr, let me post a nice screenshot for you: http://rebol.hmkdesign.dk/r3/VID3/vid3.png |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3669] | auto-resizing pleasssssee... |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3670x2] | is there |
It's a little buggy ATM and needs more features, but the resize algorithm resizes the UI, no matter what you resize: the window or an element in the UI. So if you have a box in the middle of the window with stuff around it, and you make it bigger, the other elements are automatically displaced. | |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3672] | what's missing? |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3673x2] | Proper even spacing between UI elements. I think the window also sometimes does not resize properly, if content is resized. I may have missed some ways to do things in the layout dialect, so I may be wrong. |
still in the prototype stage, so some things will probably change. | |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3675] | how compatible is the vid3 dialect with current vid? |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3676] | Gabriele should answer that... |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3677] | He's gone for the night |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3678] | well, some layouts can be used, but things like ACROSS, BELOW, PAD are not in VID 3 (yet?). |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3679] | Ok, so largely the same then |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3680] | the principles are the same, just allows for resizing, so some new words to handle that are in there. |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3681] | an evolution of Vid rather than a revolutionary product |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3682] | hopefully also FEEL hell will be either gone or at least very reduced. |
Graham 25-Jul-2007 [3683] | what do you FEEL about porting list-view ? |
Pekr 25-Jul-2007 [3684] | auto resizing needs imo to support - resizing in x, or y axis, or both. Then we need anchoring - I wont e.g. button corner to be always aligned to area bottom-left point. Then we need the ability to turn reizing off for certain elements. Then we need limits for particular elements, to aviod unwanted resizing sizes ... etc. |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3685] | Graham, I don't think I FEEL quite up to it yet. :-) I don't even know yet how to code with GOBs properly, as they are a bit harder to manage than faces. There will hopefully be a solution to that. There is a much better text list already in VID3 than in the old VID. It even has columns. :-) |
Pekr 25-Jul-2007 [3686x2] | nice screenshot. But at first sight I miss on some fundamental elements - no accelerator keys yet? No visual focus representation? Is there focusing system inside already? |
the current look of the ui is a bit ugly. | |
Henrik 25-Jul-2007 [3688x2] | partial focusing is there, but these things you mention are still in the design phase. |
what's wrong with the UI look? :-) I think it's perfect. ;-) | |
older newer | first last |