AltME groups: search

My point is: an undefined word error is a user error, and exiting 
the interpreter with an error message is currently the best thing 
to do. I've removed the exit points after such errors because you've 
asked me to for making your demos run without exiting. But I shouldn't 
have done that.

You should strip it from a LOADed block before passing it to DO.

PRIN/PRINT now do an implicit REDUCE of their argument. Internally, 
it does a `reduce/into` to re-use the same block buffer each time, 
diminishing significantly the stress on the memory manager.

I've removed Q from the console-specific module thinking it was in 
boot.red. :-) Needs some rest.... I will put Q back in console.red. 


Sorry Arnold. BTW, how do you manage to call quit the console if 
you redefine Q for custom usage?

I use 'q A LOT on R2 console. In scripts no need that shortcut but 
on console it is a MUST for me :) I open/close R2 console every 30 
seconds to do something like english-turkish translation, to see 
NOW, to use functions manipulating clipboard etc. then Q-it..

Hi do not recall it exactly but I think it was when I was developing 
the checkersgame program and somehow I had a variable q and when 
the code was executed the program and the console closed forcing 
me to restart REBOL.  

The solution you have chosen now will pretty wel have prevented this 
behaviour, still offering a shorthand for quit in console mode is 
welcomed by many. Good thinking again!

For now, the best you can do is read all the files in red/runtime/ 
that will give you a good insight on how to add new features.

BTW, we need to add doc-strings to all functions in %boot.red, I 
like the Rebol short but meaningful strings, but I have a few questions 
first:

1) Could we borrow them from R3?

2) Does that fall under Apache license too (I guess so, but just 
checking)?
3) In such case, where and how do we to put proper credits?

What does this do (I don't have access to Red here):

repeat i i: 3 [print i]

My first reaction was the same as Endo and Bolek, because I'm used 
to the way it is. I rarely have to alias a loop counter for access 
outside the loop, and I like the language being smart enough to help 
me, so I don't have to declare these things all the time, or worry 
about leakage.  However, my recent work on the idea of a new, general 
LOOP func (%mezz/new-loop.r here for those who didn't follow it) 
made me keenly aware of loop costs.


I've only had a few instances where it really mattered, but I've 
still almost always avoided FOR, for performance reasons.  Doc thinks 
things through carefully, and he has already said that FUNCTION could 
probably be smart enough to handle things for us, but we would have 
to consider how that works, to avoid environment dependent behavior. 
And how it affects very simple map/filter funcs. That is, do those 
one-liners now need /local specs.

Gregg, I'm still open to counter-arguments. If you want the language 
to do the job for you, FUNCTION should be able to provide you that.

Compiling the console works out of the box as described on my Macbook. 
I am impressed. The Repeat by Endo does what I read it that it should 
be doing. The Doc: is it intentional?
red>> repeat i 10 [  ]
== 10
red>> i
== 10

is what I expect it to be after the performing of the repeat. Unless 
you argue that i should only be valid inside of the repeat, but you 
should work with a function then not with a repeat. I do not see 
what is not to be liked about that?

In REBOL and Red it is the human way that is leading not the programmers 
mind that is used to bend along with the computers view of the world.
Again beautiful progress Doc.

For conditionals, do you want to use TRUE as a shortcut? Rather than...

 "If condition is not FALSE or NONE ..."

 "If condition is not TRUE ..."

Doc string question. Example:

if:	make native! [
	[
		"If	condition is TRUE, evaluate	block; else	return NONE."
		cond	 [any-type!] "Test condition."
		then-blk [block!] "Block to	evaluate."
	]
	#get-definition	NAT_IF
]


1) For simple funcs, do we want to include doc strings for params 
that seem self-explanatory?


2) Do we want to include periods at the end of param doc strings? 
REBOL includes them for function doc strings, but not param doc strings 
(it seems).

Anyway, you can read/write including networking with Kaj's cURL binding 
already, but not to do something basic like 1.1 + 2.2 yet

I've started on some Red mezzanines in %Red/mezz/ here. Early days, 
but my hat is off to Doc for how far Red has come already. Yes, I 
crash the console a lot, and I can't DO files yet, but I can paste 
code into the console, play, and still make really good progress.

You can also give console-pro a file or URL to DO on the operating 
system command line

Do you propose using github or something to host the Red/System bindings?

Kaj, I did a Google search on isNaN and cannot find a list of C libraries 
that don't support it (or that do).  Do you have any ideas on how 
to do this check?

AdrianS: Unfortunately, it won't work for me:

From their FAQ:
1.3 Does Everything search file contents?

No, "Everything" does not search file contents, only file and folder 
names.


I find that I search within file contents at least as much as for 
filenames.  It shouldn't be too hard to write a Rebol-based standalone 
exe that would do this.  I'll add it to my growing list of scripts 
to write.

Yes I have. It's great fun. Starting from the basics, seeing what 
you need to build everything else, and re-thinking how to do things 
because things like PARSE aren't there yet.

A new dual core machine? Do they still manufactor those? 

I kind of had the idea the OS decides when to use more than one processor.

Doc, on stress testing, I was just trying to do eyeball speed testing 
of some mezz code.

Since it's early days in Red, I'm toying with a lot of ideas and 
revisiting old REBOL funcs as I port them. JS has an interesting 
spin on MAP. I thought I'd see how hard it would be to do in Red.

Another note: messing up with the stack (using push/pop) in a user-function 
is fine as long as you returned the stack clean before calling a 
function that could generate an exception. Failure to do so will 
result in a crash. It might be possible to make stack-unwinding for 
exception resistant to such cases, I will investigate that.

No need, I will process tonight as I need to do a bit more work on 
exceptions (like documenting them).

Anyway, you don't need any conversion for Latin1, so you just have 
to do it for the other two formats.

I'd be happy to look at a UCS-2 to UTF-8 conversion function but 
I don't have the time to do it at the moment.

It would be best to do the conversions on the fly, that is why I 
want to wait for I/O get done to implement such conversion routines. 


Anyway, for doing it now, you need to allocate a new string, the 
best way to do it is:

    str: as red-string! stack/push*
    str/header: TYPE_STRING
    str/head: 0
    str/node:  alloc-bytes size


The new string! value will be put on stack, so any other call to 
a Red internal native or action might destroy it. Also, keep in mind 
that the GC is not there yet, so intensive I/O might quickly eat 
up all your RAM.

I didn't think that it was possible to mix using the Red Memory Manager 
and C memory management in the same program. Is it safe to do so?

Really the thanks should go to Nenad. Without his help, I still be 
trying to work out how to do it.

How do you mean? What you seem to ask is already possible

Seeing how much trouble we had forcing us to call the C library setup 
in Red programs, I think libraries don´t need to do it, but that´s 
conjecture

I've found a nice keyboard configuration that seems to do everything 
I want

If Doc needs to do updates another place, that's not good, as we 
need to help keep him focused. If someone else is responsible, that 
would be best.

Franckly, I've reached my limit wrt to communication channels. Also 
it would be counter-productive to me to do such tasks, I see no reason 
why it couldn't be done by someone else?

Especially as it had nothing to do with Git, yes.

I'd like to know what your development environment for Red/System 
is especially that used by Doc.
In the meantime...
	My development environment:
	OS: Windows 7
	Editor: Notepad++ v5.0.3
	  not the latest version but I prefer this one,

   using "Python" as the language for syntax highlithing and coloring

   (there is not a "REBOL" language) and used mainly for the folding 
   on indentation

   (I can not live without folding, and folding on indentation makes 
   life even easier)

   I have added a menu item with a keybord shortcut to run REBOL with 
   the currently shown file as argument.

   I have added also a menu item with a keybord shortcut to run my modified 
   version of REBOL-Word-Browser

 At the end of the r/s file I add these lines (mostly taken from Bruno 
 Anselme):
		#if OS = '???? [{
		REBOL []
		appname: "myprog"

  rs-dir: %../Red-master-0.3.2_Bruno/red-system                ; locate 
  here your red-system directory
		dest: rejoin [what-dir appname ]
		print [ "------ Compiling" appname "------" ]
		do/args rs-dir/rsc.r rejoin ["-o " dest " " dest %.reds ]

		print [ "Destination file:" dest ]
		call/wait/show/console dest
		halt
		;}]

 This way pressing the shortcut I can run REBOL that compiles the 
 program I am writing and than starts the program.
	Any suggestion is welcomed!

5) "Yes, I think it's very dangerous to claim that Red has Unicode 
and Latin-1 support". Red *has* Unicode support, string! and word! 
value support Unicode, input Red scripts are Unicode, PRINT outputs 
Unicode characters. Latin-1 is used as an *internal* encoding format, 
I don't remember ever claiming that "Red supports Latin-1 for I/O" 
except for the console script (which is wrong, I agree). OTOH, I 
do remember thinking about supporting it at the beginning for printing, 
then I found it cumbersome to support in addition to Unicode mode 
and dropped it during the implementation.

So, currently, only 7-bit ASCII is safe to input in the console. 
This limitation has nothing to do with Red implementation or the 
interpreter, it's a console input issue, so generalizing it to whole 
Red is inaccurate and unfair.

There is as I read this a different issue. Dock want Red to be as 
complete as posible, Kaj wants it to officially useable. Kaj really 
needs UTF-8 (and or Latin-1) character support, for getting this, 
I guess this has to do with the Syllable operating system amongst 
others.

I would like Red to support time and random functions as natives 
and (Gregg is one of your mezz funcs REJOIN ? I want that too) be 
able to connect to a MySQL database so I can dump PHP for some webdevelopment.

Besdies that we all love to see a VID (like) solution for display 
and creating apps. 

We have to be patient agreed 100% amongst everybody? Where the roadmap 
mentions all things to progress Red, above things are not on that 
list. I want Red to have enough to make it useable in production 
and after that expand, imho that is the way to really attrackt more 
funding/enthousiast programmers and make sure current support does 
not fade/ loose interest.

Why is it such a problem to have some criticism, too?

 There is no problem with that, and believe me, you can't be more 
 critical on Red that I am myself. But I find it really unfair to 
 paint a bad picture of whole Red because some features that are planned 
 are not yet implemented. 


I can't go faster than the music, to get I/O done with required encoders/decoders, 
I need to setup the ports/devices infrastructure. To do that, I need 
objects support done. Also, as shown by my entries on Red Trello 
page, error! (and typeset!) support and getting a Unicode runtime 
lexer are even more prioritary to make Red "more usable for real-world 
apps". Moreover, when you manage a lot of tasks, some of them marked 
as "important" that keep been postponed because of other more urgent 
ones, will at some point become "urgent" themselves. That is what 
is happening with shared libs support, which is a blocker for getting 
Red on Android and iOS. I'll also probably make a Java bridge prototype 
this week before getting back on other Red features.

Almost forgot about the Trello page. Do you use that page as an interim 
planning for what is actually being worked on? If so, and once you 
have few minutes of spare time (I can imagine you don't :-), maybe 
one sentence reference on the Roadmap page would make it a nice addition:

You can find actual tasks we work on on the following Trello page

 .... it would make feel ppl more dynamic about the project, as Roadmap 
 page is rather static. OTOH we can watch Git commits, twitter, but 
 still if one needs to know, what is an actual priority, and as far 
 as Trello page is being updated, it would make some sense. E.g. "Download" 
 addtion was imo very nic simplification for those starting with Red 
 ...

Doc: what do you mean when you say Textpad doesn't support  Unicode 
? I use Textpad 5.4.2 and see options to set UTF-8 as default text 
encoding and others options for BOM and so on.

The #call directive invokes a Red function, it has nothing to do 
with Rebol's CALL native.

Actually, it's fairly simple, think about a GUI app that sends a 
click event to your Red/System binding, how do you pass the event 
to Red code if you can't call it from Red/System. ;-)

Is there a Red/System page that states its goals? e.g., Is Red/System 
meant to be bare bones, or do you see adding some higher level elements, 
like D. I ask because D has various array types, and didn't know 
if you planned to implment a few core elements at the lowest level, 
so they can be used in Red/System, and then just exposed to Red.

One of Red/System DSL goals is to be as close as possible to the 
hardware, not as far as possible. This implies that no arbitrary 
abstraction layers will be ever added to Red/System that can't be 
more or less directly mapped onto some hardware features. 


Exceptions exist when some targets do not provide a basic feature 
that others are providing. For example, ARMv5 family do not have 
integer division, nor modulo support, so I had to implement it manually 
in the ARM emitter in assembler:

https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/blob/master/red-system/targets/ARM.r#L372


Another one is the runtime exception system recently added (THROW) 
to Red/System, which also required a specific assembler routine:

https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/blob/master/red-system/targets/ARM.r#L2008

Being able to do whatever C does without its outdated syntax and 
bloated toolchains is a dream coming true. ;-)

@Peter I took the liberty of commenting the document here https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/wiki/Ideal-array-capabilities
We could add Nenad's comment on it too. 
It is a giant wishlist indeed :)

@Nenad, "Being able to do whatever C does without its outdated syntax 
and bloated toolchains is a dream coming true. ;-)" it is :)

@Kaj do you have a url that takes me directly to these files?

Do you want to add using it with GET and POST ?

Very much so and connecting it to my MySQL database as well! But 
that is not yet possible at this time. I do not see a use for a form 
if I cannot save information from it.

R2 has all these possibilities, on rebol.org are various examples 
of scripts. For Red we might train our patience muscle of finance 
Nenad in the 'right' direction.

Do you want me to send you an error log it generated in the working 
directory?

Hi Doc, I was messing around with the PE.

Added section: [.rsrc  [-   #{00000000000000000004000000000000}]] 
in compiler (this should be just empty .rsrc, and trying to build 
it in PE.r using:

oh/rsrc-addr:			section-addr? job '.rsrc
oh/rsrc-size:			length? job/sections/.rsrc/2


but the address is pointing into wrong position (512B less). You 
probably don't know without some deeper examination, what may be 
the reason, do you?

Btw. there should be:
    .rsrc				#{40000040}	;-- [read initialized]

at this line: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/blob/master/red-system/formats/PE.r#L119
(the section name starts with a dot).

if the .res is just binary representation of the rsrc section, why 
not. But be able to append icon without need to use hacking tools 
would be nice as well. But we must do small steps here. At least 
we, who don't have Doc's brain:)

I might miss some basic OS understanding. Guys, how do you work with 
all the path? I have JAVA installed, REBOL installed, yet what I 
am strugling with, is path. When I follow docs, it always seems to 
be easy. Docs state:


do/args %rsc.r "-dlib %bridges/java/JNIdemo.reds -o %bridges/java/JNIdemo"


well, for normal user, in order to try that, user needs to understand, 
he has to start Rebol for that. So there are basically two options:


- running REBOL from icon. Then you have to change-dir to where Red 
is - in my case, something like C:\!Rebol\Red

- I thought, I might use just "pressing ENTER" upon Red.r, which 
launches console for me. But above still will not work, unless I 
change-dir into red-system subdir. It should be imo either stated 
in the docs, or some shortcuts provided, e.g. red-system.r, allowing 
me to launch console directly in that subdir, and then above command 
would run just OK.


I am not stating anything is wronk, it is upon user to improve the 
workflow, but surely it is an obstacle for occassional user.

Now back to docs:

2. Compile and run the JNIdemo.java app from console:

        $ javac JNIdemo.java
        $ java JNIdemo


Well, when in console, my console does not recognise javac, nor java 
executables. Apparently a path problem, but I have JAVA installed 
via installer. So I have to go inside JAVA dir, which means:

cd c:\Program Files (x86)\Java\jdk1.7.0_21\bin\
javac c:\!rebol\!Red\\red-system\bridges\java\

Any tips? :-)

I will do a prototype wrapping of the Android GUI API in a few days, 
so you'll be able to put your VID-like dialect on top of it. ;-)

Doc, tried to clone your examples, so that I could do some first 
tests by trying to adapt your code, I got into strange problem. I 
copied your hello.red into pekr.red and generated the pekr-lib.dll. 
Changed bridge.java to load pekr-lib.dll. And - it works. However 
- when I tried to clone bridge.java into pekr.java, or simply change 
"class bridge {" to e.g. "class fridge {", to generate differently 
named java app (fridge.class), it does not work. Is bridge class 
somehow hardcoded somewhere in the API?

btw - I was able to add the button:

        button: java-new [
                java.awt.Button
                "Test"
        ]
        java-do [frame/add button]


.... but then label does not display :-) The layout manager probably 
needs different technique to work with. Btw isn't AWT really old, 
something like 1995? :-)

Now question to API. On SO I found comparisong of AWT vs Swing:

... to add a child to an AWT frame you'd write:

   frame.add(child);   


However using JFrame you need to add the child to the JFrame's content 
pane instead:

   frame.getContentPane().add(child);  


How the above function could be invoked via API? Would java-do [frame/getContentPane/Add 
...] work?

Or perhaps two java-do's in a row should do it. I'm not sure how 
to pass the child object, though

Is bridge class somehow hardcoded somewhere in the API?


Yes, that's a Java/JNI requirement. The name of exported symbols 
from the shared lib have to include full Java class names. Do not 
change the name of Java classes in bridge.java.

Would java-do [frame/getContentPane/Add ...] work?


No, as Kaj said, you need to split it in two parts. However we could 
extend the API to handle sur syntax, but at this point, it would 
be overkill.

Working in Android Studio a bit, looking into structures, what does 
it support, etc., I can't foresee, what our aproach is going to be, 
so lookinf forward to it. E.g. the IDE generates GUI definitions 
into XML files, ditto various configs, translations. So - what I 
expect is that you create basid .apk with certain featureset, and 
from that on, it will be manipulated from Red side. Justo wondering, 
if we will be able to dynamically generate UI elements, etc? Or will 
you suggest ppl to use your basic .apk, do certain work in Android 
Studio, and the supporting backend in Red? Or is your idea that ppl 
should not need to eventually touch sw like Android Studio?

That's going to be hard. A lot of information will be lost in compilation, 
especially for Red/System code and especially when the compilers 
will do optimisations

Kaj, not to interupt your interesting conversation with the other 
"doc" but I was wondering if you could briefly summarize what one 
can do with all the bindings you have created. I specifically am 
interested in what that all means to android.

To get a feel for what Red can currently do, it's best to run my 
GTK-browser example, here in the Red/ folder for your platform:

It uses only libraries known to be shipped with OS X, so it's just 
the one executable. But you do need 32 bit versions of those libraries

I think, string parsing is not 100% yet (need to do more tests), 
but block parsing should be there.

I got the red-core interpreter running here btw. That was easy. But 
I miss a HELP function in there.

And I see a lot of functions, so it seems to have come quite a way, 
but no DO of scripts?

I/O is not in Red, only in my extensions. DO is the internal interpreter, 
so it doesn't know about my I/O. It's a good point, I should try 
to override DO

I think, it would be a lot easier for e.g. Gregg to create mezzanines, 
if he could do a script with them, like cortex.w and rebol.w in World.

It's very introductory, like What, Why, When, Where. You need that 
before you know to do HELP function!

I agree that TO [a | b] is very important in a parser. I was surprised 
when I found that R2 doesn't do it

Idiom I long time wanted - to [a | b] might be more expensive imo, 
as it will do incremental searches, evaluate the lower index and 
apply the rule. Whereas recursive [a | b | skip rule] will skip one 
positition at a time, trying to match rules .... or that is how I 
imagine the difference :-)

I do not "reserve" anything for anybody. I just know that "using 
trial and error" is (unfortunately) not the way how to get things 
done.

Ladislav, so simple question - so would you discard to [a | b]  from 
the R3? Do you find it as a performance penalty, or teaching ppl 
wrong habits, preventing them to actually understand, what is parse 
about, or something like that?

Do you find it as a performance penalty, or teaching ppl wrong habits, 
preventing them to actually understand, what is parse about, or something 
like that?

 - The answer is "no" to all the above questions. It is neither a 
 performance penalty, nor teaching people wrong habits or prevent 
 them to actually understand...

I imagine Doc will profile things if performance becomes his argument. 
I support what makes it easier to use PARSE to get the job done, 
though sometimes there may be confusion between those who understand 
parsing at a deep level and those who don't. I would rather have 
support for TO [a | b], and other rules, even at the cost of them 
having lower performance, versus people not being able to do the 
job at all. In docs, we can note the tradeoffs, and people can optimize 
if necessary.

Is Gabriele still going to do the parse implementation?  Or was that 
just a rumour?

For your information, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsing_Expression_Grammar
gives some PEG related info that could be used to explain how REBOL 
uses PARSE to do almost ALL the same work ... and presents some fundamental 
differences with CFG and RegEx parsing. As you'll see for some simple 
(and not so simple) grammars REBOL Parse function works on par with 
the PEG theory.

Parse: I simply wanted to try porting Topaz's PARSE. Not sure if 
that would or could become the built in one. I hope to still be able 
to do it eventually... we'll see.

well, not sure my English is OK for that :-) Nor do I feel technically 
skilled, to claim anything about the language and its characteristics 
....

If you are not sure of your english being good enough, well go ahead 
and just do edit the site and we will tell you what can be approved. 
Nothing held against you! Happy to see a little more life (or is 
it live) on the site. together we can do more than on our own. It 
takes just some initiative now and then.

I could try to do something like that, but it will be a playlist 
under my account, not very findable/ related to REBOL/Red

Anton, which is the behavior question. Do you expect SPLIT-PATH to 
return a target you can write to (i.e. a file)?

Let's widen the discussion a bit. Spitting a string at a delimiter. 
Easy enough to define clear behavior if the series contains the delimiter, 
but what if it doesn't? Most split funcs return an array, splitting 
at each dlm. If no dlm, return the original series as the only element 
in that array. 


What if we always want to return two elements? e.g., we have a SPLIT-AT 
func that can split a series into two parts, given either an integer 
index or value to match. Let's also give it a /LAST refinement, so 
it can split at the last matching value found, like FIND/LAST works. 


Given that, what do you expect in the case where the dlm (e.g. "=") 
is not in the series?

    SPLIT-AT "abcdef" "="   == [? ?]
    SPLIT-AT/LAST "abcdef" "="    == [? ?]

I haven't had the time to follow all the discussion in detail, but 
to me, the second part of split-path should NEVER return a directory 
path. 


when doing   set [dir file]  I should be able to count on the fact 
that the second part is either a file or none.  The same for the 
first part which should always be none or a dir.  I have my own implementation 
in R2 which makes this strict and it simplifies a lot of code.
so we can do with absolute certainty:

if second set [dir file] split  path [   ]


IIRC some of the versions of my split perform a clean-path to simplify 
and add robustness to the result.

(I do not object against adjustment, but would expect the help string 
to be changed as well to be compatible with this)

I prefer

split-path %foo
== [%./ %foo]


The reason is because I believe split-path shouldn't require an extra 
check if all you want to do is read the base directory that a file 
is in.  I think this is a common use of split-path.

Do our preferences come from the basic difference of whether we want 
SPLIT-PATH to be "smart" about file specs, or whether it should assume 
nothing (the REJOIN invariant case)? For example, Andreas's path 
invariant (p/:t) makes a lot of sense, but some of his examples' 
results look wrong when just viewed as results. e.g.:

;   %/              [%/ %/]
;   %//             [%/ %/]
;   %./             [%./ %./]

It could only do that in relation to a file system or with the simple 
heuristic used by DIR? as well: based on the presence of absence 
of a trailing slash.

Andreas, the trailing slash is the separator.  Are you proposing 
that split-path do a system check to verify if its a file?  like 
dir? does in R2?

if it where a generic string handling function I'd agree with you... 
but its not... it has added meaning, it splits filesystem paths. 
 its not just a string.  if it where, I'd use parse or some tokenize 
func.

I see absolutely no merit in trying to make split-path act like a 
generic string handling func.  the point of the func is to separate 
folder and file into two parts.   to me it comes down to either you 
decide that when there is no data you invent a default, or use the 
internal one which is none, which works well with soooo many other 
funcs.  if there is no directory part in the path, do not try to 
find a suitable value for it... there is none... funny, even when 
trying to explain my point of view, the actual sentence reads almost 
like a line of rebol source.  :-)

The problem is, that while the R3-GUI is now more flexible by removing 
reactors, it is also more difficult to understand. I remember trying 
to understand the 'on-action issue in the past, now I briefly re-read 
the doc, and I still can't understand the design. I need following 
things to be cleared up for me, so that I can both use it, and possibly 
explain it to others:


1) If you look into Actors docs - http://development.saphirion.com/rebol/r3gui/actors/index.shtml#
, there is no mention of 'on-action actors. There are many actors 
listed, but not the 'on action one


2) The 'on-action actor is mentioned in the attached doc at the same 
URL, describing, why reactors were removed. So here is the definition 
of 'on-action: 

        a) "The ON-ACTION actor is useful if the style needs to call some 
        default action from multiple places (actors) in the style definition." 
        - understand the purpose, but why and when I would like to do such 
        thing? Any example easy to understand? Just one sentence maybe?

        b) "For example, the BUTTON style needs to call the default style 
        action from the ON-KEY actor and also from the ON-CLICK actor, so 
        it is better to call the ON-ACTION actor from the both code points 
        to avoid the necessity to override multiple style actors." - looking 
        at button or even clicker style definition, I can see no such stuff, 
        as 'on-key or 'on-click calling anything named 'on-action. That is 
        the part that is most confusing for me, and which did not help to 
        understand the 'on-action a little bit. Are we talking about the 
        'do-face here?


There is also a question, if better name could be found for 'on-action. 
Unless I can fully understand, what happens here, difficult to suggest. 
Now to make it clear - I am not judging architecture, just trying 
to get my head around the docs and button/style examples. And being 
average reboller - if I have difficulcy to understand it, the chances 
are, there is more ppl, which will strugle in that area?

Apart from Unicode, we have no comparison over REBOL2 for new and 
better feature which could motivate the programmer.
 - wrong again, you surely heard about:
- essentially all cycles being natives in R3
- money implemented as a "truly decimal" format

- functions implemented differently to be compatible with multithreading, 
etc.
- closures implemented natively
- Parse improved significantly
- R3GUI improved
- new modules feature
- I do not even have the time to list all...

From my experience one of the golden rules of life is (wow that gets 
philosophical): Waiting doesn't change thigns, you need to do it.

Imo MaxV is trying to do the stuff, just look into his blog. He is 
just comparing what he was used to, with his new experience imo

Could you please complete the list of changes in REBOL3

 - that is a problem: I do not think such a list can be made "complete". 
 Some changes actually are "code cleanup", e.g. Also, there is a time 
 problem: I would have to browse R3 Chat, CureCode, AltMe, DocBase, 
 Carl's blog, Carl's R3 doc, GitHub, whatnot to do it. Why do you 
 think I am the one who has got the time to do it?