World: r3wp

sigh alright

somewhat tom

knowing more about how it will be accesses inser delete moce selecr 
would help choose a stratagey

if everytime you do a 'write' you need to sort 400mb file.. i would 
say yeah

Ok.. it's like this..

sorted keys you could binary seatch  to avoid linear scan

Terry;  Go back to the QRAM days, segment everything. :)  It only 
adds an order of
magnitude in complexity.  :)  Love Wintel...

Sorry.  I shut up now.

My data is structured using a semantic network model..  entites.. 
ie:

tweety   isa   canary
canary   isa  bird

bird   haspart   feathers
bird   haspart  beak

so you have seperate hashees of different relationship types

so currently its stored as entity - attribute - value  in a single 
db table using 3 cols

isa hash and partof hash

(lots of arguments out there regarding EAV as DB model...  most say 
it cant be done.. I say rubish.. works beautifully on a university 
project currently at 3 million rows of data)

it does work very well

It just seems that relation db is overkill   all i need is key/values 
 ... something like this.. 


n: [ tweety [ isa  "canary"  hascolor  "yellow"] canary [ isa "bird" 
haspart "beak"]]

I am wondering if you have a smallish number of relationship types 
 if splitting  into EA tables  getes you anything

the attributes are smallish

Brian, I believe words in blocks are limited as well

I do REBOL with pretty small datasets.  Could be  I just did a test 
of 1'020'000, but
I was inserting the same word with a number...not unique words.

yeah.. unique is the key  .. i need unique

Is there a need to maintain three columns, over say -- (bird [haspart 
feathers]) or (bird haspart/feathers)

(moving to DB Chat)

Brian, try -- repeat x 10000 [unless attempt [to-word join "w" x][break/return 
x]]

Warning: this will inhibit your ability to make new words in your 
console session.

any benchmark docs comparing certain functions with others?  ie: 
  foreach [ a b c ]  n..  vs   forskip n 3   ?

well, forskip is a mezzanine. you'd want fast loops to be done with 
natives like foreach

Joel Needly  et .al. used to bench mark all sorts of things on the 
mail list a few years back .tthe benchmarks would likely need to 
be redone with current versions of rebol

benchmarking: my site contains a very accurate block execution time 
measurement function

(and I have got a benchmark there measuring overall speed using a 
couple of algorithms - they are derived from a Byte benchmark published 
in june 1988) - we are quite a bit faster than the C language was 
on an average computer back then :-p)

btw, accurate measurement shows, that the high resolution timer is 
not very accurate

Ladislav - so we exchanged dynamic nature of language and sacrificed 
speed by doing the step 20 years back :-)

Ladislav;  I hope you don't mind, but I put a link to %timblk.r in 
a lot of the rebol.org
timing script documents.

Check http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/documentation.r?script=timeit.r#toc-4
for a sample.

Any ideas on the best way to escape javascript as a Rebol string.. 

It's not uncommon to have double quotes, single quotes and curly 
braces in a single line  ie:


<a href="" onclick="$('mydiv').alpha({transparency:50%});"> Fade</a>

FYI .. built a block with 1 million  (random 1000000) integers then 
ran a forskip myblock 3   vs  foreach[ a b c ] myblock
forskip time:  0:00:02.828
foreach time: 0:00:00.046

time the while loop while you are at it (db chat sat 8:58)

closer to the forskip time I would imagine

and a parse-rule.

Terry, the reason is foreach is native and forskip is a somewhat 
heavier mezzanine which calls WHILE to do its work. See Henrik's 
comment above.

Can't you just put curly braces around the string Terry?

um I can ;)   didnt' realize you could nest curly braces

Keep your { and } balanced in your Javascript snippets. You can't 
escape { in strings, so you might need to have parts of your code 
in "" or use ^(7B) instead.

Not being able to escape { in strings is a bug, by the way.

actually its possible from files, only console is broken
>> load "{escape ^^{ please }"
== "escape { please "

a ^{ is enough of course, but must be escaped for the ""

ok.. so you store it using ^{   and ^}    but how do you filter out 
the ^ later on?

Using html special characters would make sense (or unicode) given 
the content is primarily web centric

ie:{"hello" {world}}

Then convert for rebol based string manipulation

>> replace/all ie "{" "^(7B)"
== {"hello" ^{world}}

The ^ is filtert out by the loader, in the string is only a {

>> head insert/dup "" "{" 64

== {^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^{^...
:)

yeah, but what happens when you send that to a web page?