World: r3wp

the rebol3-gui of RMA is on a good way. now we would like a R3 fixe 
to have the GUI on Linux & Mac !!!!!

Is there some good documentation about ports and schemes? Finding 
anything on rebol.com is almost impossible.

I don't know of anything current from RT, but maybe these will help:

http://www.rebol.net/docs/prot-http.html
http://www.rebol.net/docs/
http://www.compkarori.co.nz:8000/Rebol3/Schemes/Http

Thanks! I also found this useful doc

http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Schemes:Notes

There were imo better docs. I'll try to find my previous posts, I 
gathered some links ...

http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Ports
http://www.rebol.net/wiki/Port_Examples

http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0130.html- More about Port layers - 
the OSI Model

http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0129.html- Simple TCP example: HTTP 
web page transfer
http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0128.html- Skip and Seek on ports
http://www.rebol.net/wiki/TCP_Port_Details

Should we copy these to the REBOL 3 Schemes group?

I have not understood REBOL response of Sunanda question

     b: reduce ['now]
    do first b
    (nothing on console)
    do b
    ==6-Mar-2011/0:48:32+1:00
    do do first b
    == 6-Mar-2011/0:48:32+1:00


Why 2 "DO" are needed when you use FIRST ? Which is the difference 
?

The same for DO B/1. Which is the difference between the WORD "now" 
used by "DO B" and the WORD "now" you get from DO B/1 ?

In R3, DO of a word! value is basically equivalent to GET of the 
word. So in the example above, the first DO performs a GET of 'now, 
retrieving the value assigned to it, the NOW function. Then the second 
DO of the value of the NOW function performs that function.

If you DO a block, it interprets the block. In that case, the word 
is inline so it is evaluated as an inline word, as a GET then a DO.

So, getting rid of the distracting REDUCE, the first line is this:
    b: [now]

It is a block with a word! value in it. In the context that the word 
is bound to, the function value NOW is assigned to that word.

You can either have a dialect processor like DO interpret the block:
    do b

or you can treat the block like data and interpret the data yourself, 
emulating the dialect processor (all of these lines are equivalent):
    do do first b
    do do b/1
    do get b/1

Note that those lines are equivalent for that particular data. For 
other data, they may or not be equivalent.

Is there a reason this works in R3? (it fails in R2)
    >> context [a: :b b: :c c: a]
    == make object! [
        a: none
        b: none
        c: none

I'm guessing convenience.

Note that it works in USE that way as well. Specified words are initialized 
to none.

That makes some sense, thanks.

Also consistent with local words (and unused refinement words) in 
functions

The guideline in R3 seems to be that things are to be consistent 
unless there is a good reason to not be in specific cases. Fewer 
docs needed that way :)

Hmm, I do not see a consistency there anyway - system/contexts/user 
context words are not initialized to NONE

So, instead of achieving consistency in R3 we just obtained a different 
kind of inconsistency. (Actually, I do not mind much, I just do like 
to name the things properly)

There is a good reason not to be in the specific case of system/contexts/user: 
RESOLVE overriding. So this is an example of the "unless" part :)

That is not exactly what I had in mind. (especially when taking into 
account, that the usage of RESOLVE does not need to be considered 
"initialization") What I had in mind was, that:


1) there are two different values used to initialize variables: #[unset!] 
and #[none!]

2) because of that, the situation cannot be considered "consistent", 
unless one of the above values ceases to be used for initialization 
purposes, no matter whether we move some of the variables from the 
category of "initialized to #[unset!]' to the category of 'initialized 
to #[none!]'

Moreover, the local words in functions (I mean function arguments) 
actually are not initialized to #[none!]. The only observation that 
is true is, that after a function call, and only when the corresponding 
refinement is not used in the function call, the corresponding "refinement 
variables" are set to #[none!] - notice, that I intendedly did not 
use the notion of "initialized", since the function variables (do 
not confuse with closure variables) "exist" even before a function 
call is made in a sense, that can be easily demonstrated.

Carl went alive in the R3 Chat, stating he would like to once again 
start posting status messages more frequently now. Let's hope :-)

Does anyone know about some cross-platform decent serial communication 
library? I miss serial port in R3. We are playing with some devices, 
and serial communication is still being widely used method. We could 
ask Carl to release it for R3, or just map some existing open-source 
library as an extension. I could start bounty on that ....

Pekr, are you on Windows or Linux?

Windows. But I expect Linux, ARM, BeagleBoard, etc :-)

I just wonder if R2 serial communication was cross-platform? Then 
it might be best, if Carl would release the code ...

Does R3 for Windows have DLL access? You could just use the Windows 
API to access the serial port -- http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms810467.aspx

This looks like a simpler start -- http://www.robbayer.com/files/serial-win.pdf

Not exactly cross platform, though

Aargh

http://www.rebol.com/r3/downloads.html

A111, 27 Feb Linux PPC, 5 Mar Amiga OS 4 and there has supposedly 
been a Linux ARM build for a while

Why on earth doesn't Carl announce/blog/tweet this? He has plenty 
to tell, but seems to be intent on letting all supporters believe 
he and REBOL are dead

#7988: post from Carl 3d ago:
I want to get back to posting status messages on a regular basis.

the question is, what means "regular basis" for Carl :)

As Dr Phil once said: "Before I die"

yes, on regular basis, but no further reply to my comment ...

Carl sucessfully burries REBOL under ...

please move your rants to a more appropriate group

I'm stuck again. To start porting the R3 graphics to Syllable, I 
need A111 with Cyphre's FreeType enhancements. Carl hasn't published 
the A111 host kit, but RMA has. However, unlike the host kit in Git, 
RMA's version has the Linux library compiled for the newer GLibC 
2.11. It doesn't run on Syllable Desktop due to a missing symbol

Unfortunately, A111 hostkits are only available for 3.1 (Win32) and 
4.4 (Linux libc6 2.11) so far.

Not that the hostkits themselves matter much, but this also means 
libr3 is only available for those two platforms.

>> m: map [a: 42]
>> protect m
>> m/a
** Script error: protected value or series - cannot modify

Known bug? Not a bug, but a feature?

I believe that's a feature, but maybe that's wishful thinking on 
my part.

A bug. Report it.

Bug #1825 "Crash in RESOLVE" (and/or #1865 "SIGSEGV when importing 
modules") are getting annoying really soon, once you try to seriously 
use R3 modules.s

I am now regularly tripping over this in my own code, and I know 
of several people who do as well.

Where are we at with R3 ?  Is it  A110 or A111 or higher these days?