World: r3wp

>> int-to-bin-array [1 2 3 4 5]
== #{0100000002000000030000000400000005000000}
>>

hope this helps you

yes it helps me a lot

so you can see everything is possible to do (except the callbacks 
;))

to figure out in simle example this looks easy .... (hum not a lot 
in fact beacaus all the science is done by int-to-array reebol function 
witch is not pretty accessible to common or mortals )

maybe one improvemet would be great for us:

have some faster way how to construct those binary! data from Rebol

I hope this could solve the REBIN feature or else we need some another 
native functionality for that

you could makje it faster by reusing the same struct instead of creating 
a new one on each iteration

that would avoid a reduce too

and if y have twenty array sized and typed  different kind for my 
external lib I will need to wirte and handle as many function to 
play with binary content

Cyphre you comming to my main point ;) giving to carl a premaid function 
that allow us to deal easyly with array (int, float, char what ever 
type) but for struct based array that's a challenge too and an horrible 
task to do

example: struct my-struct { int a[10], char *name, other-struct ptr-ostruct[20];}

yes Gabriele this could help too....I wrote this function as a quick 
one so it can be optimized for sure

in the current way to handle you need to be very sharp to can interact 
with it from rebol and that why Cyphre you have all my admiration 
for your quick made AGG external exploitation script ...

shadwolf: I think you only need to write one global function which 
will convert you rebol block of chosen datatype into binary! form...this 
way you can pass any content to C side...

that's the REBOLTo C way but how about the C to rebol way (that I 
provide  using the MD2 file example)

As I said it is not so hard when yog get more experience...I spent 
hours when started to use DLLs from rebol. I had also bad luck I 
wanted to use very badly designed DLL in my first project so this 
was even bigger pain for me ;)

C to Rebol is very simmilar...have to leave now...bye for now

bye and thank you cyphre for your contribution to thi discution.

it was a very good source of information

and kwoledge

knowledge sorry :)

well now i know better how to handle REBOL -> C and C-> REBOL the 
idéal thing could be a convert-reb-to-c multi type, multi size native! 
function in Command and in REbol/view Pro (I think it will be added 
to core any way than accessible if you have the licence.key file)

maybe idela convertion function could be c_convert/int ma_var  with 
ma_var : [ 1 4 5 10 ] if c_convert  workon a REBOL array then no 
need to specify manually the length we retrieve the info using lenght? 
type could be treat as rafinement and a switch could branch into 
c_convert function the adapted tranlation algorithm

improving this c_convert for int64 for example could be a very easy 
task ;)

to avoid to rewrite X time the same lind of code we just in the switch 
premaid a countainer adapter to the data we want to handle.

Has anything changed with core regarding loading?  I'm trying to 
load a function using a URL, and it comes back as a block?

Has load become load/all ?

For anything other than a simple value, you've always got a block 
back from load (as far as I remember)
>> load "1"
== 1               --- a value
>> load "1 2"
== [1 2]               --- a block
>> load mold :to-idate
== [func .....         -- a block


>>

ic.. here's another .. how can i determine if a 'word has been set 
yet, in the code?

>> value? 'xx
== false
>> xx: 1
== 1
>> value? xx
== true

what if i dont want to spin the value?  is there no way to check 
other than trying it?

or wait.. nvm :)

Value? 'xx shouldn't "do" anything with the word being tested-- so 
it should be safe at all times
Or am I missing your point?
>> xx: func [] [print "hello"]
>> value 'xx
>> value? 'xx
== true      -- does not print "hello"

no, I read your post too quickly

I often wonder, why 'while' takes a condition-block, when 'if' doesn't. 
Is there an explanation for that?

of course. The IF condition is evaluated once, while WHILE condition 
may be evaluated many times.

Geomol, if you try to write your implementation of WHILE, you'll 
immediately see the reason. :)

Thanks! :-)

Given that we have a 'read-net func, would a 'write-net equivalent 
make sense? (could then have a [view] 'request-upload func to match 
'request-download)

Did I just found an error with replace? Try these:
>> replace/all "abc{def" "{" "^^{"
== "abc^^{def"
>> replace/all "abc{def" "{" "^{"
== "abc{def"

So I can't get a result with just one ^?

^^^{ ? a "^{" is the same as a "{". To allow {this ^{ is a paren} 
 .

>> replace/all "abc{def" "{" "^^^{"
== "abc^^{def"

Yes thats right. Its molded. "^" is escaped, the escape-char is "^"..

print replace/all "abc{def" "{" "^^^{"

yes, seems right

The result is 8 bytes.

But
s: {this ^{ is a paren}
gives an error: ** Syntax Error: Invalid string

>> s: "this ^{ is a paren"
works ok.