World: r3wp

but if you say that, is there a newer one? this one hangs in OSX.

when closing the port, at least.

Use Romano's actp

I was hoping not having to deal with the TCP layer.

Ive never used the async http ...

well, there are no docs for async-http.r so I can't tell at all how 
to use it and atcp-protocol.r is too low level. I'll have to rely 
on synced http.

I would assume that if Gab wrote it will be similar to the R3 http

odd bug: R2 sometimes just quits when using trace/function

Q: Can i use select/any against pairs! in a hash! ? Example?

ie: i'd like to select 432x984 using *x984

or decimals?

I'm looking for a delmiter in hash keys to separate two integers 
that i can perform a select/any on

I've never tried, but I imagine you would have to form them for /any 
to work.

It should be easy to test though.

How about this one.. 
Determine the first decimal place of  decimal
dec: 209.648
and I want to return the 6

to-integer multiply dec - to-integer dec 10

hmm, smart

Or using strings:
     to-integer form first next find form dec "."
    == 6

interesting to benchmark but I suggested a math solution as normally 
math is faster than anything else

ok, one last one for my rusty rebol

FINDing the index of all occurences of an integer in a series ie:
blk: [ 239 4545 23 655 23 656[
search for 23 and return [3 5]

(not using foreach)

use parse

first one is result: find blk 23  .. but how to quickly find the 
rest
foreach is way too slow on blocks with large amounts of data

err:  index? find blk 23

and my gut says parse is worse than foreach, no?

what's your gut got to do with it?

hmm, interesting, I am quite curious, which approach would be the 
fastest one

FIND, SELECT and PICK are blazing.. foreach is a game killer. Need 
to work out a way to FIND all values

Hmm, too long :-)

to-integer to-string first second parse to-string 123.456 "."

You could tweak something like this:
    res: make block length? blk
    while [ind: find blk 23]
         [print blk append res index? ind blk: skip blk last res]
    blk: head blk
    probe res


But remember the first rule of REBOL Code Golf: parse always wins.....We're 
now just waiting for a parse guru to show us how :)

Ladislav is working on it now :)

This is the last piece to my Redis killer

parse blk [some [s: set value integer! (if value = 23 [print index? 
s])]]

not sure my version will be the smartest solution, but you can try 
how fast it is :-)

indices?-1: func [
	series [series!]
	value
	/local result
] [
	result: make series 0
	while [series: find series value] [
		append result index? series
		series: next series
	]
	result
]

indices?-2: func [
	series [series!]
	value
	/local result
] [
	result: make series 0
	parse series [

  any [1 1 value series: (append result subtract index? series 1) | 
  skip]
	]
	result
]
>> time-block [indices?-1 blk 23] 0,05
== 0.000006591796875

>> time-block [indices?-2 blk 23] 0,05
== 0.000005645751953125

(in R3)

Could you rewrite my example as indices-3? :-)

How about Rebol 2 version?

pekr, your example will be slower

since your comparison is occuring in a mezzainine

what mezzanine?

Lad, it works in R2 as well.

if value = 23

but Ladislav is doing this 

1 1 23

yes, that (in R3) means, that the times obtained are in R3

where do I get time-block from for R3?

where do I get time-block from for R3?

Write:

do http://www.fm.tul.cz/~ladislav/rebol/timblk.r

hmm, what does this mean? Is it intended? In R3:

>> exists? http://www.fm.tul.cz/~ladislav/rebol/timblk.r
== none

Hmm, my version is much slower:

indices?-3: func [
        series [block!]
        value  [integer!] 
        /local result
][
        result: make series 0
        parse series [

               any [s: set wanted integer! (if value = wanted [append result index? 
               s])]
        ]
        result
]


>> time-block [indices?-1 blk 23] 0,05
== 0.000004669189453125

>> time-block [indices?-2 blk 23] 0,05
== 0.0000039520263671875

>> time-block [indices?-3 blk 23] 0,05
== 0.0000059661865234375

what is this dirty trick good for? :-)

1 1 value ???