World: r3wp

Graham, thanks for narrowing it down.

just tried a read, and when the second form of graham's test (using 
to-url on a string) the url parser doesn't dehex... so the username 
will be invalid.

but I guess the server is responsible for dehexing in that case.

Um, no. The HTTP standard for basic authentication doesn't hex-encode 
the user or password fields. The browser (or in our case, http scheme) 
does.

Only the path is hex-encoded when passed to the server.

ok so then the dehexing should be added in the url-parser and string 
notation used for @ containing passwords.  

just like we use string notation for files containing spaces.

this could a workaround until Carl stops dehexing in the loading 
phase.

Still haven't traced that.

>> c: load "http://user%40rebol.com:[blah-:-www-:-rebol-:-com]"
== http://[user-:-rebol-:-com]:[blah-:-www-:-rebol-:-com]

No, I mean I haven't traced it. LOAD calls other functions, maybe 
even in R2.

The 'solution' is: read [scheme: 'http user: "[user-:-rebol-:-com]" pass: 
.........]

: )

but that's not a uri  ;-)   the point of the url datatype is that 
we shoudn't need to use "specifications" but uri paths.

I know, I know.  I've just used it many times : )

The standard is very explicit on how encoding should work. Reserver 
characters must never be decoded BEFORE you split the URL into its 
parts (which can only be done if you understand the scheme). Any 
other character may be decoded just like REBOL does.


So, it's not that URL! should never decode, it's that it should never 
decode the reserved characters. Then, the handler for each protocol 
needs to decode the parts separately after splitting. Since the protocols 
we use in REBOL all have the same format basically, you can use a 
single function to handle all of them, eg. like my parse-url.

Excellent summary Gabriele. Thanks for posting that. It makes the 
problem and solution very clear.

Carl wrote:   I'm wrapping up R3 A107... so if we want to do some 
test builds for 2.7.8 on this, let me know.

The question is where. There was a similar call in R3 Chat at the 
beginning of the year, but no response there

Personaly I think putting out some test builds is always a good thing, 
 and the prudent thing to to is to make them available for the most 
popular platforms, best chance of someone doing something that results 
in useful feed back. unfortunatly as a unpopular platform user that 
means I am out.

I find the loss of data on reading a http/s page annoying.   ie, 
losing the http headers

I've inserted a save-header function here


   port/locals/headers: headers: save-header Parse-Header HTTP-Header 
   headers

but the question now is, where is the best place to store this?

actually thinking about it, it should really be 


   port/locals/headers: headers: Parse-Header HTTP-Header save-header 
   headers


as parse-header will remove duplicate header lines .. ie. if there 
is more than one cookie header, the parse-header function loses all 
but one.

This is one reason why I wrote a rest protocol.  The http protocol 
seems designed to get content the same way a browser would.  But 
as more services use http more completely, things like automatic 
redirects and thrown errors for 4xx/5xx status codes are not helpful 
(and good luck getting headers and content then).

rest.r is designed to make HTTP interaction behave more like a web 
service.  Which is the principle behind Rest, I supose.

Is anyone tracking what we need for 2.7.8 ??  http://www.rebol.com/docs/changes-2-7.html
This was supposed to be released months ago ...

Actually 2.7.8 was promised for jan 2010

Yeah, and then monthly releases

How about my help function in 2.7.8 ?

It's a modified R2 help http://rebol.wik.is/Man

We had daylight savings change this morning.  R2 shows still as +12, 
but R3 shows as +13.  Can R2 be fixed?

Rambo bug for +13 already exists:
   http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=4302&
Now all it needs is fixing :)

hmm.. I think that's different

This is an error I posted back in 2003 to the tracker .. http://www.rebol.net/cgi-bin/rambo.r?id=3174&

well not sure actually what I posted ... but my name is raised

hmm... 2003 .. that was like 4 laptops ago

Ok, what happened here???

Type desktop to start the Viewtop.
>> now
== 26-Sep-2010/13:48:48+12:00
>> now
== 26-Sep-2010/20:13:06+13:00
>>

somehow rebol2 switched timezones ... without leaving my home!

R3 uses a totally different approach to solve such issues completely, 
which I am not sure is easily backportable to R2

Exponent with a negative number gives error on R2, I've submitted 
as a bug report on rambo: -4784
>> -2 ** -4
** Math Error: Positive number required
Fixed in R3.

REBOL 2.7.8 (In Development)
http://www.rebol.com/docs/changes-2-7.html

Carl, is this still in development ?

It has been put on hold for a bit in favor of R3 development, but 
not canceled.

It is important, because R2 is the only official professionnal product.

R2 is important for other reasons, but not as much for that reason. 
Most people don't buy R2, even in SDK form.

R2 is currently in maintenance mode, with an emphasis on backwards 
compatibility. Sometimes we get new backported features from R3, 
but for the most part it is only bug fixes. The main project is R3 
now.

That's ok, but in profressionnal world even if the main project is 
R3, R2 is the main product. And you need to see bug fixes, supports 
and so forth.

You need compatibility with Windows7, new version of Linux and MacOSX.
And what about Windows Phone ?

Windows Phone 7 won't get a REBOL version without a ground-up rewrite, 
as the platform doesn't allow native code. Older Windows Mobile releases 
never were supported, though R3's host kit could in theory support 
them.

Most of what is needed for Windows 7 compatibility was also needed 
for Windows 2000 compatibility (I reported it then), and mostly in 
the /View installer and registry usage. That installer is in the 
community-supported portion of R2, so if you download the SDK source 
you can take a look. The installer changes are intended for inclusion 
in 2.7.8, as the changes doc indicates.

Since a stable GUI based release of R3 is far off still, I agree 
that R2 should be updated

It shouldn't take that long .. I'm particularly interested in the 
date parsing bug in odbc

The community of customers who *paid* for the SDK need continued 
support

I also agree. It shouldn't take that long, given availability of 
developer resources.