annoying public dir
[1/7] from: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 12-Aug-2004 23:26
Hello rebolist,
hi, is it just me who don't like that everywhere I run rebol script,
new public directory is created:(
I think, that if it's possible only one directory should be used as
in older versions - reason: I have a lot of files in the main public
dir cache which are not available if I run script from different
location:(
--
Best regards,
rebOldes -----------------[ http://oldes.multimedia.cz/ ]
[2/7] from: gabriele:colellachiara at: 13-Aug-2004 18:21
Hi rebOldes,
On Thursday, August 12, 2004, 11:26:53 PM, you wrote:
r> hi, is it just me who don't like that everywhere I run rebol script,
r> new public directory is created:(
That should probably be fixed in the next version.
Regards,
Gabriele.
--
Gabriele Santilli <[g--santilli--tiscalinet--it]> -- REBOL Programmer
Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila --- SOON: http://www.rebol.it/
[3/7] from: moliad:aei:ca at: 14-Aug-2004 0:42
rebOldes wrote:
> Hello rebolist,
> hi, is it just me who don't like that everywhere I run rebol script,
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> dir cache which are not available if I run script from different
> location:(
I sometimes wish rebol/view did not include the desktop. And there was a different product,
rebol/desktop, which was equal to current /view version.
I don't want to have to install rebol/view for it to work properly and I don't need the
desktop when using rebol 99% of the time.
-MAx
[4/7] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 14-Aug-2004 10:55
Hi Maxim,
MOA> I sometimes wish rebol/view did not include the desktop. And
MOA> there was a different product, rebol/desktop, which was equal to
MOA> current /view version.
That would be REBOL/Face (in the SDK). You can build View from it with
a few includes; no desktop.
-- Gregg
[5/7] from: moliad:aei:ca at: 14-Aug-2004 13:36
Gregg Irwin wrote:
> Hi Maxim,
>
> MOA> I sometimes wish rebol/view did not include the desktop. And
> MOA> there was a different product, rebol/desktop, which was equal to
> MOA> current /view version.
>
> That would be REBOL/Face (in the SDK). You can build View from it with
> a few includes; no desktop.
yeah, but sdk isn't free and its meant to be encapped. AFAIK, You can't share it unencapped
as an interpreter...
I would love to have a minimal face or view rebol interpreter. If I want to replace
VID, why should I want a version which includes it, for example... yet I don't want my
stuff encapped...
-MAx
[6/7] from: gchiu:compkarori at: 15-Aug-2004 9:38
Gregg Irwin wrote.. apparently on 14-Aug-2004/10:55:56-6:00
>Hi Maxim,
>
>MOA> I sometimes wish rebol/view did not include the desktop. And
>MOA> there was a different product, rebol/desktop, which was equal to
>MOA> current /view version.
>
>That would be REBOL/Face (in the SDK). You can build View from it with
>a few includes; no desktop.
>
Even if you do this, be aware that using 'request-download also creates a public directory
to store the file.
--
Graham Chiu
http://www.compkarori.com/cerebrus
http://www.compkarori.com/rebolml
[7/7] from: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 17-Aug-2004 22:47
Hello Maxim,
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 7:36:58 PM, you wrote:
MOA> yet I don't want my stuff encapped...
I agree with you, I like Rebol because I can see the code if I want.
I'm usually not running any .exe files if not necessary.
Oldes
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted