>>>implementation, without a publicly available specification. That
>>>means that any effort to create another implementation is based on
>>>inferences, guesswork, etc. etc. etc. and can't be guaranteed to
>>>match precisely the behavior of the implementation from RT.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Yes, y
Has anyone done any work at sending/receiving data from a virtual serial port ( USB ).
Is it the same as driving a real serial port? I need to drive a USB modem which I
haven't purchased yet.
--
Graham Chiu
http://www.compkarori.com/cerebrus
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an emai
Hi All,
Some interesting articles I tripped over today
from a ./ entry.
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier03/lanier_index.html
http://java.sun.com/features/2003/01/lanier_qa1.html
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Interviews/
livschitz_qa.html
http://java.sun.com/features/200
Hi, David,
David Feugey wrote:
>>>... no OSS version of the language means no fragmentation
>>>of the source code.
>>
>>That simply doesn't follow. Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. etc. etc.
>>have been open source from the beginning, and don't suffer from the
>>oft-threatened specter of fragmentation.
I find rebol's community fascinating.
We all like rebol because its different and allows the control of changing everything
to our taste in a very easy manner. Its just TOO easy and addictive!
so stop talking about unity... argghh ... grin .. huh and compatibility
... we hates
* Joel Neely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040213 07:34]:
<..>
> That simply doesn't follow. Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. etc. etc.
> have been open source from the beginning, and don't suffer from the
> oft-threatened specter of fragmentation. It simply hasn't happened.
But a cautionary tale *would* be
Rod Gaither a écrit :
> I don't use Java as a
> developer myself but I am now using Java based
> products every day.
I would like to do that with Rebol applications :)
> Of course part of this is due to decent Java support
> on Mac OS X and the lack of some products on that
> platform.
Yes, a v
On Feb 13, 2004, at 11:16 AM, Petr Krenzelok wrote:
> Yes, but I also wonder WHO of us uses Java productively? Because, last
> time I talked to Cyphre - who did some game in Java for his company,
> complained about how BAD acutally compatibility is, and wonders if SUN
> cares about QA assurance,
Petr Krenzelok a écrit :
> Joel Neely napsal(a):
> Yes, but I also wonder WHO of us uses Java productively? Because, last
> time I talked to Cyphre - who did some game in Java for his company,
> complained about how BAD acutally compatibility is, and wonders if SUN
> cares about QA assurance,
Joel Neely a écrit :
> Hi, David,
>
> The punch-line (from my perspective) is at the end.
>
> David Feugey wrote:
>
>>There are also big issues with portability.
>>
>>... no OSS version of the language means no fragmentation
>>of the source code.
>
> >
>
> That simply doesn't follow. Perl,
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Sunanda:
> > If anything is going to nudge him further down a collaborative
> > approach, perhaps leading to a more open source model, that
> > experience may form an important part of it.
>
> Chris:
> > I think the 1.3 project shows that Carl and
Friday, February 13, 2004, 5:16:27 PM, Petr wrote:
> Joel Neely napsal(a):
>> Having a definitive specification makes it possible to learn more
>> efficiently then trial-and-error or ask-somebody-when-stumped, and
>> also makes it possible to distinguish implementation defects (bugs)
>> from ca
> you could either post and screen scrape a page such as the one
> in your example or write your own sunrise function in rebol.
> I would not mind writing it but cannot take the time, well ...
> for at least a month.
Thanks Tom..
Great links. I'll probably just translate the javascript one into F
Joel Neely napsal(a):
>Having a definitive specification makes it possible to learn more
>efficiently then trial-and-error or ask-somebody-when-stumped, and
>also makes it possible to distinguish implementation defects (bugs)
>from cases of I-didn't-understand-that-feature.
>
>
>
Yes, but I als
Hi, David,
The punch-line (from my perspective) is at the end.
David Feugey wrote:
>
> There are also big issues with portability.
>
> ... no OSS version of the language means no fragmentation
> of the source code.
>
That simply doesn't follow. Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. etc. etc.
have been
Sunanda:
> If anything is going to nudge him further down a collaborative
> approach, perhaps leading to a more open source model, that
> experience may form an important part of it.
Chris:
> I think the 1.3 project shows that Carl and RT as-is can
> use those additional resources very well ...
Hi, Karl,
Karl Robillard wrote:
> I'm not a Java expert, but I assume that there is a formal specification for
> Java and that there are many implementations (Sun, IBM, Blackdown?). That
> may explain why people would be comfortable adopting Java but not REBOL.
>
The authoritative page is http
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 11:41:49 +0100, Maarten Koopmans
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 from me. The SDK is an attractive offer, as it allows you to spread
> small single-click executables.
Yes, that's why I bought it. This product needs to be pushed much more and
IMO it's much underestimated.
>
Hi Ashley,
On Friday, February 13, 2004, 7:17:06 AM, you wrote:
AT> even though "edge/effect" is set to 'none. So the question is, how can I
AT> set edge/effect to 'none?
Look at the REDRAW feel:
redraw: func [face act pos /local state][
if all [face/texts face/texts/2] [
Karl Robillard a écrit :
>I'm not a Java expert, but I assume that there is a formal specification for
>Java and that there are many implementations (Sun, IBM, Blackdown?). That
>may explain why people would be comfortable adopting Java but not REBOL.
>
>
Bof...
There are also big issues with
20 matches
Mail list logo
