World: r3wp

aka extending an existing context

don't know if that is possible...

unfortunately not - but anyway it's nice to be able to rebind the 
words in an objects context

michaelB, see latest blog entry

yes I'm pretty surprised :-) (of course in a positive way)

any notes on this?:

>> trim/tail/with "0100" "0"
** Script Error: Invalid path value: with
** Near: trim/tail/with "0100" "0"

I found that many times annoying, but it reflects the description.(
/tail and /all are mutually exclusive.

I didn't read the description, as it looks. It isn't mentioned in 
the help string, though.

I meant the help string.
all can not be only at the tail.

only at the tail and the head

>> rebol/version
== 1.3.2.3.1
the information you mentioned is missing

probably I interpreted the help string according to the observed 
behaviour.

aha :-)

so now the question is, if it deserves to be mentioned in RAMBO?

There are many places, where I wish that the mixture of refinements 
would be more relaxed.
eg open/append/lines

maybe all these cases really deserve their place in RAMBO...

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. :-)

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.

IIRC it hashes a lot now. And a benchmark is easy, fill a big block, 
search, if it is linear its hashed.

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.

Take a look:
for i 32 255 1 [prin to-char i]

Geomol, thanks. The rupiah symbol isn't there, but there is a symbol 
that will make a decent substitute.

What's up with ASYNC?

Rebol's networking layer must be somehow broken, if we are not able 
to get properly working async core ;-)

Is there a Rebol webserver that can handle POST data, that actually 
works?

Uniserve?

what is the problem with post? as for cgi, I use read-cgi as in newer 
cores ... works so far ...

Yeah, Uniserver is the only one.. but it doesn't Encap.

where do you put read-cgi in the forever loop?

hmm, dunno, but look at the source, you can simply copy the code 
to your own purpose ...

the source of which?

read-cgi ...

it distinguishes two types, get or post ...

it uses simple loop - read-io ....

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

what is monkey wrenching?

trying to get things to work

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 ...

exactly.. like I've got nothihg better to do than build a webserver 
in Rebol that can handle POST data.l..

you must be kidding, aren't you?

Ladislav, Terry is different then us - his motives are not to use 
rebol only. He is more pragmatic - while he likes rebol, he misses 
some already done solution in rebol land. He might be right, from 
his pov. His intention is to build some system, using existing components. 
The trouble is, that he can actually use rebol, but then he can easily 
find himself implementing specific details of server e.g., but his 
intention lays in some upper layers of architecture ....

I still think, that in his particular case though, implementing small 
web-server would be rather trivial task though. There are some examples 
available ...

more trouble comes with licensing of the server, if he want to encap 
it, and yet he wants to provide kind of cgi (plug-ins) to run rebol 
scripts - then he violates the license imo ...

 like I've got nothihg better to do than build a webserver in Rebol 
 that can handle POST data

 - I have seen nothing capable of convincing anybody such a webserver 
 was distributed as a mezzanine?