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

[REBOL] Re: FTP access via a port spec

From: laurent:giroud:libertysurf at: 4-Oct-2002 22:12

> You sound pretty frustrated. The documentation is sparse or not completely > helpful in some areas. In this case you were just one slash away from > practically being there. > page: read [ > scheme: 'FTP > host: "ftp.site.com" > port-id: 21 > target: %/index.php3 > user: "[myusername--site--com]" > pass: "mypassword" > ] > An alternative approach is to patch the code that parses more readily used > ftp code by adding "@" as being valid (watch for line wrap). > net-utils/url-parser/user-char: union net-utils/url-parser/user-char make > bitset! #"@"
Thank you very much ! I was hoping that there would be some simple (but hidden) way to tune rebol to obtain such a thing but had no idea were to look for it. Reading your explanation, I understand that nearly all parts of rebol can be somewhat tuned or modified so higher level components (ie the rebol surface briefly described in the documentation) can adjust to your needs and constraints. The only problem being that the documentation does not give any hint that it can be done and how to do it. Thankfully enough, this list seems to contain enough rebol knowledge to answer a zillion of questions ;) I sometimes wonder for how many time people on the list have been working with rebol to gain such knowledge ? The article you pointed to clearly shows that you have been experimenting quite a lot ! This inspires me a little reflexion (no more than 2 cents worth probably) about the nature of rebol : it looks like to me that the Rebol approach is very different from other languages, whereas they tend to present the user with a low level interface that he may "augment" by including or coding higher level components Rebol does just the contrary : it offers a high level interface to many standard protocols and data types. This interface suits the beginner needs quite well (if he has access to a good documentation system such as this list) and is ok during the time necessary to get used to the lisp-like ""syntax"" and learn how to use the most usual datatypes and functions. More advanced users can then gain more control over Rebol not by "augmenting" it with external components but by actually digging deeper into it and changing/tuning the system elements already provided by Rebol. My frustration arises from the fact that the documentation seems to ignore completely the "layer" structure of Rebol : it describes some high level elements, gives a little glimpse of lower level ones but without explaining how they relate to the former ones. I guess that it would be much more efficient if it was itself structured into layers : a first one describing all high level element, a second one dissecting those components into their distinctive elements and the relations between them, and so until reaching the lowest level (ie native functions and language interpreter). It is surely a daunting task since Rebol seems built of a big number of such layers (at least it looks like to me !) but it would surely benefit the entire community and help Rebol lose the kind of "toy language" image it has amongst many developers who only swear by open source Python, Perl, PHP, etc. languages. Does that looks meaningful to you experts ?
> I think that the mail list is the quickest way to get answers when the > documentation isn't helping. You are not the first to complain about the > documentation, and I doubt that you will be the last. It can be frustrating > at times, but I have found the rewards of REBOL to far outweigh the > frustrations. Your mileage may vary, of course. :-) > I would encourage you to hang in there, and feel more free to use the mail > list.
Be sure I will :) Many thanks again for the quality of your answers. Regards, Laurent -- Laurent Giroud