Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

[REBOL] Re: request-font

From: carl:cybercraft at: 20-Jan-2003 19:47

On 20-Jan-03, Anton wrote:
> Carl, > Yes, that worry is unfounded. > Your script will be so well known and > documented that people will trust you. :)
Oh, of course - silly me. ;) But a font-requester is used by other programs, and while the requester that's put up may look like my one, it may not be.
> If they don't, they can read the code.
No use if you're not a REBOL programmer.
> Come on, there's lots of code you run > without reading the code, admit it.
Of course, but it's in a sandbox, remember. Clicking OK at the permission request takes you out of that safty-zone.
> If you don't have some level of trust > you would never get anything done.
Sure, but we don't want to get to the point with REBOL where we're asked for permission so often that we end up clicking on OK as a reflex action. I think a better way than an update button on the requester would be to have it as a choice on the View Desktop. (ie, as a service.) Apart from being safer, this would better indicate that it's a REBOL-wide change we're making, whereas in the requester it might suggest it's just for a specific application. If this is the approach taken though, the requester will need a Reload button.
> I don't like training people to rename > and locate files in the filesystem if > it can be so easily avoided. > So I too would favour a different filename > per platform.
I think REBOL's OS version numbers are the way to go.
> Anton. >>> Still, why not have an update button? >>> to get the currently installed fonts. >> It did have to begin with. :) It also needed three scripts to begin >> with, but it went through quite a few major changes and I took >> update out somewhere along the way. >> One possible reason not to include it is the permissions that are >> required when updating. I don't like the idea of training people to >> hit okay on permissions as a matter of course. Is this an unfounded >> worry? Otherwise, there's no reason it can't be added. I had it as >> an refinement before, so the button could be left off if not >> wanted. >> Carl Read
-- Carl Read