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

World: r3wp

[Core] Discuss core issues

Geomol
14-Dec-2005
[2953]
informatin = information
MichaelB
14-Dec-2005
[2954]
Was it always like that, that make object! 'block didn't copy the 
block before and that one get's the real block used for creation 
also via third 'object ? I was a little bit surprised to be able 
to change the binding of the words in an object after creation - 
I thought this is not possible with objects - now if we only could 
extend objects ...
Henrik
14-Dec-2005
[2955]
extend?
MichaelB
14-Dec-2005
[2956]
I mean extend an object after creation
Henrik
14-Dec-2005
[2957]
as in new-obj: make old-obj [newstuff] ?
MichaelB
14-Dec-2005
[2958x2]
no, without creating a new one, just like append third 'object [x: 
'new-value]
aka extending an existing context
Henrik
14-Dec-2005
[2960]
don't know if that is possible...
MichaelB
14-Dec-2005
[2961]
unfortunately not - but anyway it's nice to be able to rebind the 
words in an objects context
Henrik
14-Dec-2005
[2962]
michaelB, see latest blog entry
MichaelB
14-Dec-2005
[2963]
yes I'm pretty surprised :-) (of course in a positive way)
Ladislav
15-Dec-2005
[2964]
any notes on this?:

>> trim/tail/with "0100" "0"
** Script Error: Invalid path value: with
** Near: trim/tail/with "0100" "0"
sqlab
15-Dec-2005
[2965]
I found that many times annoying, but it reflects the description.(
/tail and /all are mutually exclusive.
Ladislav
15-Dec-2005
[2966]
I didn't read the description, as it looks. It isn't mentioned in 
the help string, though.
sqlab
15-Dec-2005
[2967x2]
I meant the help string.
all can not be only at the tail.
only at the tail and the head
Ladislav
15-Dec-2005
[2969]
>> rebol/version
== 1.3.2.3.1
the information you mentioned is missing
sqlab
15-Dec-2005
[2970]
probably I interpreted the help string according to the observed 
behaviour.
Ladislav
15-Dec-2005
[2971x2]
aha :-)
so now the question is, if it deserves to be mentioned in RAMBO?
sqlab
15-Dec-2005
[2973]
There are many places, where I wish that the mixture of refinements 
would be more relaxed.
eg open/append/lines
Ladislav
15-Dec-2005
[2974]
maybe all these cases really deserve their place in RAMBO...
MichaelB
15-Dec-2005
[2975x5]
this is from the blog-chat: 

I liked Ladislavs function and just extended it a little bit: maybe 
bind would be nice like that - one can bind only the words one wants 
to and also only the types one likes, unless using plain, then all 
words of the same spelling get bound

old-bind: :bind

bind: func append copy third :bind [
	/only only-words [block! any-word!]
    /plain
    /local pos rule item
][
	if copy [words: copy words]
		
	either only [
		if any-word? only-words [only-words: reduce [only-words]]
    	if any-word? known-word [known-word: bind? known-word]

     if plain [forall only-words [change only-words to word! only-words/1]]

		parse words rule: [
			any [
				pos:
				set item any-word! (
					if any [
                	    all [plain find only-words to word! item]
                	    find only-words item
                	][
						item: old-bind :item known-word
						change pos :item
					]
				) | into rule | skip
			]
		]	
	][
		old-bind words known-word
	]	
]

f: g: h: i: 1
bl: ['f g h i]
c: context [f: 2 g: 3 h: 'hello]

bind/only bl c [f 'h]
get-values: [
	get to-word first bl
	get to-word second bl
	get to-word third bl
	get to-word fourth bl
]
probe reduce get-values

bind/only/plain bl c [f 'h]
probe reduce get-values

bind bl 'system
probe reduce get-values

bind/only bl c 'g
probe reduce get-values
sorry - layout got a little bit destroyed :-(
the function has still some small problems: eg: doesn't return the 
newly bound block and might change with 'plain refinement the 'only-words 
block
I hope a more correct version of only 'bind-only - just to have not 
something too wrong lurcking around

bind-only: func [

    {Binds only selected words to a context. If taken 'lit'erally even 
    just words of the same kind.} 
    words [block!]
    known-word [any-word! object! port!]
    only-words [block! any-word!]
    /lit
    /local pos rule item
][
    if any-word? only-words [only-words: reduce [only-words]]
    if any-word? known-word [known-word: bind? known-word]
    unless lit [
        only-words: copy only-words 

        forall only-words [change only-words to word! only-words/1]
    ]
	
      parse words rule: [
		any [
			pos:
			set item any-word! (
				if any [
                    				find only-words to word! :item
                    				all [lit find only-words :item]
                			][
					item: bind :item known-word
					change pos :item
				]
			) | into rule | skip
		]
	]
    words
]
I find it useful - just used it. :-)
BrianH
16-Dec-2005
[2980]
I have a simple question (I hope): What types does the hash! type 
hash? I recall it hashing strings, but does it hash words and other 
types as well? I'm wondering for what key types it would be useful 
to use a hash! to store the records. If the key type isn't hashed, 
there is no benefit over using blocks.
Volker
16-Dec-2005
[2981]
IIRC it hashes a lot now. And a benchmark is easy, fill a big block, 
search, if it is linear its hashed.
Louis
17-Dec-2005
[2982]
Is there a special symbol in the REBOL language for the Indonesian 
rupiah? I need to make a script to convert funds from US$ to Indonesian 
Rupiah.
Geomol
17-Dec-2005
[2983]
Take a look:
for i 32 255 1 [prin to-char i]
Louis
17-Dec-2005
[2984]
Geomol, thanks. The rupiah symbol isn't there, but there is a symbol 
that will make a decent substitute.
Terry
25-Dec-2005
[2985]
What's up with ASYNC?
Pekr
26-Dec-2005
[2986]
Rebol's networking layer must be somehow broken, if we are not able 
to get properly working async core ;-)
Terry
27-Dec-2005
[2987]
Is there a Rebol webserver that can handle POST data, that actually 
works?
Pekr
27-Dec-2005
[2988x2]
Uniserve?
what is the problem with post? as for cgi, I use read-cgi as in newer 
cores ... works so far ...
Terry
27-Dec-2005
[2990x2]
Yeah, Uniserver is the only one.. but it doesn't Encap.
where do you put read-cgi in the forever loop?
Pekr
27-Dec-2005
[2992]
hmm, dunno, but look at the source, you can simply copy the code 
to your own purpose ...
Terry
27-Dec-2005
[2993]
the source of which?
Pekr
27-Dec-2005
[2994x3]
read-cgi ...
it distinguishes two types, get or post ...
it uses simple loop - read-io ....
Terry
27-Dec-2005
[2997x3]
Look.. here's  what I'm trying to build with Rebol   http://www.uniformserver.com/
 

a fully powered webserver you can take with you on a USB Stick or 
even your camera's flash drive.
even has .htaccess security
I'm just so tired monkey wrenching Rebol
Pekr
27-Dec-2005
[3000]
what is monkey wrenching?
Terry
27-Dec-2005
[3001]
trying to get things to work
Pekr
27-Dec-2005
[3002]
to get things work? you can create rebol server in one page script. 
That it is not complete solution like uniformserver? well, it is 
not .... if something is not available out of the box, you simply 
have to code it yourself ...