World: r3wp

well, it's just a shame to have to reconvert to a char!

doesn't work with 0 for timezone

ahah, yes

BY THE WAY,

pick "+-" negative? now/zone

fixes the 0 issue

-1 => "-" , and 0, +1 => "+"

sorry ... it should be  

pick "-+" negative? now/zone

Is my understanding of find/part wrong, or is this a bug?
     series: ["a" "b" "c" "d" "e"]
     find/part series "c" at series 3  

     == none      ;; fails to match using the [at series 3] part of  'series
    print mold at series 3  
    == ["c" "d" "e"]  ;; but [at series3] does contain the match

The /part <range> argument (at series 3) is supposed to mark the 
end of the search range. So, here FIND is searching in ["a" "b"] 
only.

>> find/part series "c" 3
== ["c" "d" "e"]
>> find/part series "c" at series 3
== none
>> index? at series 3
== 3

This looks like an inconsistency to me.

what do you mean Doc ? It has been always like that.

with /part you can specify a length or a terminal pointer to the 
serie.
What's wrong with that ?

/part makes the compare a record.  so its expecting a block to match 
I think.

? find
        /part -- Limits the search to a given length or position
                length (number! series! pair!)

It seems clear to me

/part -- Limits the search to a given length or position
, you're right, I've missed the "length or" part..

it should say "tail position" to be exact

doh.... sorry... my mind mixed-up /part with /skip...

Thanks. What was confusing me is an inconsistency between R2 and 
R3 -- was not sure if R3 was the bug fix or the problem.
R2:
    select/part series "c" at series 4
    == "d"
R3: 
    >> select/part series "c" at series 4
     == none

*** Do we agree R3 is right in this case?

yep

i use /part a lot, for example when i want to to find something in 
the first line of a text.
>> find/part text "something" any [find text newline tail text]

Looks like its a RAMBO report then, rather than curecode :)

Bind. I often use blocks of field (column) names from a db table 
in functions. Trouble is when I add a field I have to go back and 
add that field name to every place where I am using my fields.  I 
was thinking of just creating a block at the beginning of my code 
and then using "bind" to create a local context. I just can't seem 
to make it local. It behaves as a global. Is there some trick?

columns: [a b c d e f]
>> c1: use columns copy/deep reduce [columns]
== [a b c d e f]
>> c2: use columns copy/deep reduce [columns]
== [a b c d e f]
>> set c1 1
== 1
>> set c2 2
== 2
>> reduce c1
== [1 1 1 1 1 1]
>> reduce c2
== [2 2 2 2 2 2]
>> c1
== [a b c d e f]
>> c2
== [a b c d e f]

C1 and C2 are locals

Thank you Steeve. Never used "use" before and Bindology 101 was like 
Bindology 596 for me. :-)  (no offense Ladislav ) Thanks. I also 
didn't know you could set all the members of a block like that.  
Appreciate your help.

James, in my functions that fetch sql data I just setup all the variables 
as local and do a set on the record

eg.

func: [ get-sql /local name dob address ][
	foreach record records copy db-port [ 
		set [ name dob address ] record
	]	
]

>> name
** Script Error: name has no value
** Near: name

>> get-sql: func [/local name dob ][ set [ name dob ] [ "Graham" 
now/date ]]
>> get-sql
== ["Graham" now/date]
>> name
** Script Error: name has no value
** Near: name

ooops .. need a reduce in there .. but you get the idea.

Yes, that's the way I do it. exactly. My problem is that I often 
add some field and have to go back and add it to all the functions.

And so I was looking for a global way without the global (if you 
know what I mean)

well, you can create a context inside your functions

nope .. that won't work.

I looked at that and it creates an object. Would be ok then my laziness 
shows up and I don't want to have to use object paths.

won't work anyway

Looking at "bind" it appears it should work. It even describes an 
example which is what I want to do:


Binds meaning to words in a block. That is, it gives words a context 
in which they can be interpreted. This allows blocks to be exchanged 
between different contexts, which permits their words to be understood. 
For instance a function may want to treat words in a global database 
as being local to that function. 

unless you declare the variables as local , or use [ local-variables 
.. ]

well, you still have to bind either using 'use or 'bind

Graham, it's really about laziness on my part.

BTW, sorry to hear about your site.

if you're lazy, your code will break!

I know. And when I do add things like new fields I'm just asking 
for trouble.

Graham, this should work.

o: make object! [
    page: "1"
    total: 4
    records: "22"
    rows: reduce [

        context [id: none cell: ["Quantum of Solace" "Marc Forster" "2008" 
        "Daniel Craig" "200"]]

        context [id: none cell: ["Casino Royale" "Martin Campbell" "2006" 
        "Daniel Craig" "150"]]

        context [id: none cell: ["Licence to Kill" "John Glen" "1989" "Timothy 
        Dalton" "36"]]
    ]
]


i.e. objects become objects and blocks become arrays. What exactly 
was breaking?

Gregg, Hello. He was trying to help me.

I'll give it a go.

Hmm.  Seems to work .. but it help to have an example of how it is 
supposed to work!  no docs.

Just wondering what it takes to write a "printer driver".  If I pretend 
to be a network printer listening on port 9100 ... can I just capture 
all the data coming to me or do I have to respond to interrogation 
as well?

RFC covering Internet Printing Protocol are listed here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol

I'm not sure that IPP uses port 9100.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1179

I remember that I  did once a rudimentary lpd/lpr, but i forgot on 
which pc

Graham, because we can write to a printer with:

Interesting .. I never bothered before to find out what IPP was.

write tcp://<ip-number>:9100 <some data>


it should be straight forward to act as a printer listening on port 
9100.

Since you can dump to a port on a jet print server on port 9100 ... 
I assumed it was dumb.