Easy-vid and New Docs idea --> Was Cookbook submissions ieda
[1/3] from: gerardcote::sympatico::ca at: 10-Jan-2004 17:39
> > I didn't find any info about this REBOLDOC project on Robert's website > > (Saw an OpenDOC entry but nothing else)
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>> > editing by other ML members. > I have web-space, we can host the stuff there.
I have not decided yet where I will post results of my own work but if we have to work together on some material I'll be glad to be hosted by your site.
> > In this case I would prefer to install a plain wiki I got many years ago > > that worked well here locally the first time I tried to install it -
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>> The hard part is 2 ;-) IMO it makes sense if we create a plain good old > faishoned Rebol documentation paper. One big HTML page etc.
First - About the tool : The easy-vid tool already exists and I am now trying to adapt it to display the results coming back form some script as executed by View when launched by the user viewing the code. For View code it worked easily since it is its native intent. When I first tried to send the results to a console window instead of putting them inside a face for View display, it wasn't very useful since after closing the console View was gone with it and the user would have to restart the easy-vid to continue. I then remember that REBOL can't call itself as an other app to run so I almost abandoned - but non more since when I search for the REBOL Call mechanism with Google I found the refs to the otiginal Doc but also the doc related to the View 1.3 that already includes the Call mechanism in its beta distro. I am now trying to launch some external script code usint Call but I have also read a severe limitation about it as it is currently implemented - Under Windows the console window is automatically closed after the exec - a default switch is applied whatever the coder is using during the Call - this is a bit annoying since I want the user to be able to look freely at his results before manually closing the console if it desires to do so. This should be left as an option for the coder but I don't really know the why of all of this. Surely there is some useful reason that justifies this way of doing things - May be some guru can help me with his lights ... Currently I also have some difficulties when storing to a disk file my script with Write or Save as the stored code is never as it should - sometimes without a Rebol header and other times all the code is squeezed together without spaces between the elements. I'll look further but I am not abandoning. Some clues here ? I tried mold but it doesn't work either. Second - The content : I agree. One big page should do the job while the content is the most difficult part to cope with, And I go hand in hand with you when you say that a lot of code is of no real use for beginners if it not explained as must be.
> IMO we don't need an other Wiki. My idea is to create a manual you can > read front-to-end, not a fragmenting pool of snippets. First, we have > enough such pools, second, those only help you if you know quite a lot > about Rebol. Robert
May be for my personal use but A simple Editor supporting many windows open at a time are really all what I need to work efficiently here. In the spirit of sharing this is another thing however. Your web page may be the missing part to this dilemna. I'll wait from you and continue to work on my new experimental easy-vid. May be I'll prefer to use a face's View for displaying results of REBOL Core code instead of using a console but I hoped to use a console to leave the user experiment at his own peace the new material learned before closing it. Bye, Gerard
[2/3] from: didec:tiscali at: 13-Jan-2004 21:13
Re: Easy-vid and New Docs idea --> Was Cookbook submissions ieda Hi Gerard, I like your doc project, It's a big job and I hope the community will help you enough. Just a comment about the doc/tricks/how-to you can collect and archived. Take care to record when and from where you took the info. I just think of the future. Rebol as evolved and will evolve again. Certainly, piece of "first days" code are probably broken or useless in last version of Rebol. And probably new version will act the same with actual "state of the art" script. So recording "when a script was code" and "on witch version" it was intended to run, should be usefull info for future (2 years far) reading of your doc. Best regards DideC
[3/3] from: gerardcote:sympatico:ca at: 13-Jan-2004 22:15
Hi Didec, you're completely right with the question of keeping clear the time dependancies of any piece of software. But discussions too will have to follow this temporally dependant scheme. When it will become available in a couple of days or two, just follow the very first three emails from the ML archive back in the thread dated from 23-juil 2000 Msg to Gabriele from Elan - 22 msgs are in the thread - Discussing about Contexts. You'll then see the evolution from REBOL 1.0 to 2.0 - when related to the contexts. If I come back to time and versions dependencies of the scripts themselves, RT should keep back any REBOL version for download on which some Library script kept is actually or was then based upon until someone decides to modernize the script or retrieve it from the library. Regards, Gerard
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted