r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

Maxim
17-Oct-2009
[14856x2]
ok, so parse is the root of my problem.  it specifically word binding 
for its keywords, but looks up all other words... which is what's 
causing the inconsistency in my code.
specifically *ignores* word
Steeve
17-Oct-2009
[14858]
I don't see your point, what you say seems wrong, can you give us 
an example ?
Maxim
17-Oct-2009
[14859x2]
in my code, I was getting different results for some keywords.  any 
is bound to global, but some isn't anything in rebol.
so since I can't create my rules using to-block (cause the parse 
rule is actully changing itself, using pre-bound rules... I'm stuck.
Steeve
17-Oct-2009
[14861x2]
well, just bind yout rules in a specific context.
con: context [
	any: 'any
	some: 'some
	opt: 'op
	...
]
redefines the parse keywords as you want
Maxim
17-Oct-2009
[14863x2]
so what I'll do is follow parse's functioning.  if a word maps to 
a function or a native, ignore it... I know my rules don't bind functions, 
cause they'd fail anyways.
yeah that would work too.
BrianH
17-Oct-2009
[14865]
Maxim, BOUND? doesn't bind words to the global context - that was 
done by LOAD. Try this:
>> bound? first to-block "a"
== none
Maxim
17-Oct-2009
[14866]
yes yes... that was understood later on.
BrianH
17-Oct-2009
[14867]
I'm trying to hack up an UNBIND backport to R2/Forward though.
Maxim
17-Oct-2009
[14868]
load is the core culprit here.  I didn't realize that all my rules 
where being bound at application load time, since every word is created 
by load initially.
BrianH
17-Oct-2009
[14869]
That was one of the first things changed in R3. If need be you write 
your own loader for R2 that uses TO-BLOCK and then does the binding 
itself - LOAD in R3 is a mezzanine that does the same.
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14870x3]
>> d: now/time
== 17:11:08
>> d/1
== 17
>> d/2
== 11
>> d/3
== 8.0
>> d/3: 0
== 0
>> d
== 17:11
>> d: now
== 23-Oct-2009/17:11:37+13:00
>> d/4
== 17:11:37
>> d/4/3
== 37.0
>> d/4/3: 0
== 0
>> d
== 23-Oct-2009/17:11:37+13:00
>> t: d/time
== 17:11:37
>> t/3: 0
== 0
>> d/time: t
== 17:11
>> d
== 23-Oct-2009/17:11+13:00
I can change the second component of a time! but now when it is part 
of date!    ???
but not ...
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14873x3]
date doesn't have accessors for individual time values...
once you use d/time, its a new value of type time!
you have to use d/time: t  in order to push it back into the date.
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14876]
inconsistent
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14877]
I would have tought R3 would have addressed this, but it hasn't  
:-(

... I just checked
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14878x3]
>> date: now
== 23-Oct-2009/19:31:27+13:00
>> type? date/time
== time!
>> date/time/3
== 27.0
>> date/time/3: 0
== 0
>> date
== 23-Oct-2009/19:31:27+13:00
What exactly is the explanation here??
I'm accessing a time value .. not a date value
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14881x2]
date is a point in time... 
time is an amount of time...

they aren't the same thing.


you can have time values with 50 hours in them,  but you can't have 
50 hour days.
but I would like to be able to interact with the time within a date 
directly anyways myself.
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14883]
Lets put it in curecode
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14884x2]
yep. it might already be there as a request.
the issue probably is that if you did

date/hours: 50


its a logic error.  so how is it resolved? ... an error... add two 
days, two hours?
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14886]
You can alter the day, month, year and zone ... just not the time
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14887x4]
there is a bug in any case!!!  

>> t: 50:00
== 50:00

>> d: now
== 23-Oct-2009/2:40:09-4:00

>> d/time: t
== 50:00

>> d
== 25-Oct-2009/2:00-4:00
here it seems it added two days ... but didn't add the 2 extra hours 
!!
so, I guess the handling wasn't speicifically designed by the date 
object, and is simply a side effect of its internals.
(thats in R2 A90)
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14891]
actually all i wanted to do was to round the time off to remove all 
the seconds
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14892]
*R3*
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14893]
but I have to extract the time, round it off and then set the date 
time value back :(
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14894]
put it into curecode and add the above bug within the report... it 
will add to its relevance (and priority) within the post.
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14895]
I don't hve the link close to hand ...
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14896]
google rebol curecode... first link
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14897x3]
Not for me .. I get vid extension kit!
nope .. not in google on those parameters
Let me try google.ca
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14900]
I get the rebol doc base page for R3
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14901]
Hmm... perhaps I need to remove "google" from the search!!
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14902]
hahahahha
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14903]
I pass ...
Maxim
23-Oct-2009
[14904]
hum... that can take different meanings... hehe

  http://curecode.org/rebol3/
Graham
23-Oct-2009
[14905]
I don't wish to create an account ...