World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
Paul 22-Feb-2010 [1001] | >> obj: context [a: does [probe self]] == make object! [ a: make function! [[][probe self]] ] >> obj/a make object! [ a: make function! [[][probe self]] ] == make object! [ a: make function! [[][probe self]] ] |
Ladislav 22-Feb-2010 [1002] | yes, Paul, that is what I mean |
Steeve 22-Feb-2010 [1003x3] | it's not exactly what Brian said though :) |
the FIELD (as an exported property) doesn't exists anymore. >> in context [] 'self == none | |
Or still private but not public anymore | |
BrianH 22-Feb-2010 [1006x3] | Yeah, sorry, I was more exact in the comment of the ticket you wrote. |
In any case, the code that you have been using to demonstrate your complaint (with the exception of Paul's above) is an example of what we are trying to avoid people doing. Don't use IN object 'self, it's a bad idea. Use BIND?. | |
So to discourage that behavior, 'self is hidden as-if with PROTECT/hide (effectively, not really), blocked from modification as-if with PROTECT (effectively, not really), not counted by LENGTH?, not unprotectable by UNPROTECT and only referenceable through BIND block! any-object!. It is unknown by anyone other than Carl whether the field actually exists in the object at all - I would guess that it does, because the alternative seems more complex and that's not his style. In any case, every reasonable effort has been made to discourage its use in any way except in code like Paul demonstrates above. R2's usage of the word was a security hole, and unnecessary once we got the BIND? function, both in R2 and R3. | |
Steeve 22-Feb-2010 [1009] | >> context [self: "hello"] ** Script error: cannot set self - it is protected ** Where: make context ** Near: make object! blk Was possible within R2 |
BrianH 22-Feb-2010 [1010x3] | And was a security hole. And so is explicitly blocked. |
Fortunately there is an alternative to the insecure code that was added to R2 later in its life: the BIND? function. It's in R3 as well. | |
The alternative was added later, not the insecurity. | |
Paul 22-Feb-2010 [1013] | where is query-string at now? No more system/options/cgi? |
Jerry 22-Feb-2010 [1014x2] | Last night, I dreamed that Carl announced in his R3 Blog that A98 was released. The first thing I did in the morning was to make sure it's real. It's not. ... I need to see a shrink, seriously. |
I am mentally damaged. | |
Paul 22-Feb-2010 [1016] | never mind the query-string thing. I think I got it figured out. Althought RT needs to document this under the R3 wiki section. |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1017] | Jerry ... we all wish for things to proceed faster. However, we have to wait a bit. Hopefully Carl is doing wildly in the HostKit/Extension area, so that guys can proceed with other areas, as GUI for example ... |
Graham 23-Feb-2010 [1018x2] | thought he was working on redoing the r3 docs ... |
There's a real paucity of news at present. | |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1020] | The only news is recent Twitter post: "AltME.com website, DNS, WNS, and various other changes quite disruptive today, but should settle down soon." |
Graham 23-Feb-2010 [1021] | nothing regarding R3 development |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1022] | I know ... |
GiuseppeC 23-Feb-2010 [1023x2] | 2 years ago, in times like this I were really upset: "were are we going ?", "when will it be usable ?", "I need it !" ... Now follow the various REBOL channels with curiosity. I expect nothing. When it will be ready I'll be happy and start using it. |
(* I follow) | |
Graham 23-Feb-2010 [1025] | Expect nothing and that's what you'll get |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1026] | The truth is, that I was claiming to guys here, that we are at 80% of the dev stage, one or more years ago. But we are still there. Unless HostKit is released and contains stuff devs need, we can't move much forward. I hope we are close to that stage. It is just, that we are close to it for several months already :-) |
Graham 23-Feb-2010 [1027] | Everyone ( well, perhaps not Henrik ), is on hold ... just waiting. |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1028] | But there is still lots of work to do for Core too. E.g. tasking, or other stuff listed in priority doc. |
GiuseppeC 23-Feb-2010 [1029] | Graham... things go this way on REBOL. We have to wait... |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [1030] | I am encountering a crash, dunno if easily traceable. I start R3, type-in "chat". Then I quit the chat by "q", then I type "demo" .... and R3 crashes ... |
Oldes 23-Feb-2010 [1031] | I'm not on hold. I'm just using only R2 regulary. |
ChristianE 23-Feb-2010 [1032] | Pekr, the procedure you describe works for me on Rebol3 version 2.100.97.3.1. My %rebol.r in the same directory is virtually empty. |
Graham 24-Feb-2010 [1033x6] | Pekr, same happens to me |
Why would chat kill the demo ... unless http is modified or something? | |
Oldes, this is the R3 group ... so on hold means on hold with R3 ! | |
Pekr, putting a trace before demo and it doesn't crash. Very odd. | |
of course I can't do much with the trace running ... | |
Still tracing ... seems to be doing a lot with nothing happening. I would have thought the whole GUI would be in a wait | |
ChristianE 24-Feb-2010 [1039] | I've been misleading, what I wanted to say was: I do not get the error Petr describes, the demo comes up. |
Graham 24-Feb-2010 [1040] | Still tracing .. what on earth is it doing?? |
Oldes 24-Feb-2010 [1041] | It's working here on XP |
Graham 24-Feb-2010 [1042] | So, the demo comes up okay for you after exiting chat? |
PeterWood 24-Feb-2010 [1043x2] | I tried the chat then demo trick under linux and Rebol crashed with a segmentation fault. Normally, the demo gives a script error. I also tried on Mac OS X but that was okay - the demo gave a script error. |
This should be reported in CureCode. | |
Graham 24-Feb-2010 [1045x2] | I was wondering why some messages don't show up on chat. Eg. #6993 |
when I do a 'n, but show when I type the number in... | |
BrianH 25-Feb-2010 [1047x3] | 6993 wasn't a message, it was a move of 2 of Paul's messages to the right heading. Not every number is a message - everything gets a number, including headers, moves, deletes, file operations, etc. |
Only messages show with n. Some file operations show with nf. Other operations don't show at all, except in effect. | |
Some messages don't show because they are private messages that don't involve you. If you can see those even by entering their numbers directly, please report that serious bug. | |
Mchean 25-Feb-2010 [1050] | any news? |
older newer | first last |