World: r3wp
[Core] Discuss core issues
older newer | first last |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10351x2] | what version is that? |
ok I see I didn't have the spaces on the attempt one | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10353] | In your version, the syntax error was at load time, before the attempt was called. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10354] | This isn't good for dynamic data. If something is populated dynamically then would have to account for the spaces and check the dynamic data. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10355] | >> mold [ < ] == "[<]" |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10356x2] | Yeah but that isn't acceptable for me. |
I would classify that as a workaround and the problem still to be a bug. | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10358] | I said it was unfortunate :( |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10359] | hehe |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10360] | It used to be the case for to-file "" too. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10361] | ahhh well hopefully we can get it fixed. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10362] | >> [>] == [>] Not a problem for < |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10363] | Yeah just the one needs fixed then. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10364] | >> [< [ ] == [< ] |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10365] | yeah that is why I need the mold to trim the lines from something like that. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10366x2] | >> [ < ] == [<] >> new-line [ < ] true == [ < ] |
Same value, different display. | |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10368] | >> c == "[<]" >> d: [] == [] >> append d to-word c == [[<]] >> e: first d == [<] |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10369x2] | >> mold new-line [< ] true == "[^/ <^/]" |
It's a little longer, but at least it will load and have the same value. | |
btiffin 29-Apr-2008 [10371] | On this I tried a: pick first system/words 122 (umm 122 will vary of course) b: make binary! 0 save/all b a c: to block! b |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10372] | >> new-line load mold new-line [< ] true false == [< ] >> mold new-line load mold new-line [< ] true false == "[<^/]" |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10373x2] | I'm staying away from load |
just for my purposes anyway | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10375] | As long as you control the save, load is all right |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10376x2] | I think appending might be my solution for my purposes. |
I can't have the newline in the block. | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10378] | Right, you read/lines. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10379] | Thanks guys, I think I got a solution. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10380] | Cool. |
btiffin 29-Apr-2008 [10381] | Cool; A little background for Brian's sake. I bumped into this trying to move my LOCATE routine to TRETBASE so I was using system/words as a source for testing. Didn't make it past entry 122 < to lit-word! didn't make it past 111 '/ kakks too. |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10382] | If you think that's bad, look at this: >> [<]>] == [<]>] |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10383] | hehe I'm dizzy |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10384] | >> length? [<][>] == 1 |
btiffin 29-Apr-2008 [10385] | Nice tags. :) Leave it to Mr Hawley to get the crux |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10386] | Sees it as a tag |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10387] | Nasty, eh? :) |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10388x2] | yes ;-) |
I think I'm on to something in REBOL and I want some input on this. If I define a block in a function such as: my-func: func [data /local blk][blk: copy [] append blk data print blk clear blk] Now even though blk is cleared will the memory still be allocated to the size the blk expanded to accomodate the data argument? If so, instead of clearing blk would it be better to unset or set blk as none at the completion of the function? I'm just guess that REBOL's garbage collector wouldn't want to clear the memory allocation of blk since it doesn't seem efficient to do so. | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10390] | That kind of thing was the original motivation for the ALSO function. Try this: my-func: func [data /local blk][blk: copy [] append blk data print blk also blk blk: none] |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10391x2] | forgot what the source of also looked like. I might need to load 2.7.6 |
So is the fix really to just set blk to none? | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10393x2] | also: func [ {Returns the first value, but also evaluates the second.} value1 [any-type!] value2 [any-type!] ][ get/any 'value1 ] |
Yes, that is the fix. You should also set data to none. | |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10395] | Yeah good point. So we really don't need ALSO to free the memory then right? |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10396] | ALSO is to let you return a value assigned to a variable, and still be able to unset the variable. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10397x2] | Thanks Brian. |
Why was ALSO created? | |
BrianH 29-Apr-2008 [10399] | For cleanup. |
[unknown: 5] 29-Apr-2008 [10400] | I don't fully comprehend the also function. I know it is getting the value but why pass it twice? |
older newer | first last |