/no-waitseems to be a culprit.
f: function  [return view [do [x: none] button "test" [x: "hello" probe x]] ]vs
g: function  [return view/no-wait [do [x: none] button "test" [x: "hello" probe x]] ]both has
xas local (
?? g) but only 2nd one doesn't work.
/no-waitis not the culprit. In the first case
viewand waits until it finishes, and
xhas its context available because we're using it during
fcall. In the second case you explicitly ask to not enter View event loop, so you instantly get face object back, which has
xin it bound to
f. Problem is that
fis gone, since function call was just finished. Hence the error message.
f: does [...].
Red 0.6.3 for Windows built 22-Oct-2018/19:39:48+02:00 commit #d3c8c4fseems to be "stable" enough but I need to test it more.
if's truthy value and
while's block of code (condition) seems natural.
if <condition> then <then-block> end&
while <condition> do <do-block> end). I don't see that syntax as weird... it all depends on the language of choice. Some languages have some things you just don't like. You can like it or hate it - de gustibus non est disputandum.
@nedzadarek of course I had seen any-type and block in help. My point is I contest this design choice as a condition is semantically one thing so there's no reason to have 2 different sets for value.
The problem here is that you are missing something pretty important. Gregg and others are trying to help you by giving you a chance to understand, instead of just memorizing an answer to the question. If you don't care, I'll be happy to tell you why they HAVE to be different.
@lepinekong_twitter, your view on what is good for a user of the language is no more correct than the rest of us, and given that the original designer of Rebol, and people with deep design experience and almost 2 decades of use with Redbol langs, disagree with you just might count for something.
Let me make it clear, you quite consistently complain about Red's design, saying it's wrong, and that is simply not the case. Red is designed to be the way it is. If it isn't what you think it should be, you can either back up your claims with facts and concrete examples to support your view, or you can implement your own language (using Red if you want).
If you want to continue this topic, here's what you need to do. 1) Show us that you understand the current design. 2) Provide examples for your proposed change and explain how it's better. @giesse said he's happy to explain why they are different, and you can take him up on that, as others may learn (or someone else can ask for his explanation as well if they want).
@greggirwin switched to help, thanks, sorry for spamming docs...
@9214 this is a while loop so it just infinitely fails as you said
read/binary also fails
2018-10-24 19:42:25.049 console-2017-8-3-49893[50282:5010968] CFNetwork SSLHandshake failed (-9836) *** Access Error: cannot connect: https://source.unsplash.com/random/310x200 reason: timeout
maybe some issue with SSL handshake as log says...
read https://freegeoip.app/csv/ works
curl -vvv it looks like SSL is configured the same on both endpoints, only diff is response time
@nedzadarek I wish to return to this topic:
( https://gitter.im/red/help?at=5bbd2756600c5f64237ef9e1 )
foo: [bar [baz 42]] w: 'foo/bar/baz get w ; == 42 reduce w ; == 42
I expected GET to return the LIT-PATH and not the value, as I read "get the value of W which is a LIT-PATH".
probe to-path GET w ; == 42
This because I associate the tick " ' " to "not evaluate, passive object which"
I have tried
>> 'foo/bar == foo/bar >> type? 'foo/bar == path! >> type? foo/bar *** Script Error: foo has no value *** Where: type? *** Stack: >> type? foo/bar *** Script Error: foo has no value *** Where: type? *** Stack:
As the standard working is "words in paths are not evaluated", the message "foo has no value" seems that foo is getting REDUCED,but I know it is not the correct-
'is there for words and paths?