World: r3wp

found the bug. (and I need more coffee)

There were problems with using all three refinements [ /all/compare/skip 
] together in earlier versions of REBOL. I believe they are fixed 
now.

I think the compare feature is just a bit underdocumented.

Script error: REPLACE has no refinement called ONLY

I can use CHANGE/ONLY FIND ...
What do you think, skould I RAMBO it as a wish?

rebolek, yeah, I think it would make sense to have that.

It's mezanine, so I'll try to figure out some fix and post it.

cool

Hm, was easier than I thought :))

Posted

>> regexp "[hello-:-world-:-re]" "[a-z0-9._%-]+@[a-z0-9.-]+\.[a-z]{2,4}"
== true
;))

Anyone else want a regex compiler that generates parse rules? Semantically, 
regex is a (very) limited subset of parse so it shouldn't bee too 
hard.

I working on it right now. the above example is copied from console

some things are not implemented yet and there some small problems 
but I hope I can solve them

I was looking for something, but nothing seems to exist. So I started 
mine, I'll release some first version soon.

http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=like.r

The reason that regex compilers for REBOL are rare is that parse 
is more powerful than regex, and most people who start trying to 
implement regex usually learn enough about parse during the course 
of doing so that they switch to using parse instead :)

Still, if you want help, a tester or a second opinion, post your 
code on the Parse group and we will optimize it for you.

It's funny, there's no better optimizer than the members of this 
world trying to show off and one-up each other :)

I love this community. One of my favorite things is the ML threads 
that optimize code and bring out different perspectives on design.

Hey... what's the code to prevent  the security from popping up in 
windows?  added -s to a shortcut, but not working?

-s should work...

in 98% of cases I agree with what Brian just said about Parse being 
more powerfull than Regexp.  but in those 2% regexp is SO much more 
powerfull, that it still has its place.   now some of you will ask 
me to say when or why, (I know how we as rebolers think and like 
to challenge each other ;-)  but I cannot give an exact example, 
but having had to implement a few complex systems in both, I remember 
a few times in parse when I'd remember how a single char would replace 
2-3 lines of parse "tricks".

so, having a regexp WITHIN parse would be oh so incredible.  especially 
since Parse allows such an easy way to traverse data at such a fast 
rate.  having regexp to take "decisions" would scale pretty nicely. 
  OTOH having rebol to take decision could be an alternative too.

Parse is good at matching, but sometimes, a simple condition "means" 
something which is hellish to implement as a set of explicitely mutually-excluding 
matches.  regexp is a little easier in this case (note I use easier 
not in style or readability here... just in raw expressiveness).

if we could add a conditional within the dialect of parse directly 
(without using tricks, which I know many will be tempted to demonstrate, 
and many which I already know about) then parse itself would have 
another level of expressiveness IMHO.

one example could be to use the return value of evaluated parens 
as a "matched? or not" in order to continue in a parse rule.

this would allow us to make much simpler rules sometimes, especially 
when such decisions are not based on simple left to right loading 
of values, but sometimes based on interdependent values, which only 
take meaning once certain patterns have been loaded.

for example, not only the type and shape of data, but its actual 
value?  have I loaded enough of this, for this rule to qualify.  
is a specific attribute set to a mandatory value?  there are many 
such examples.

again, I know most patterns CAN be described using parse, but in 
many occasions, what could have been a simple parens with a decision 
and 2 or 3 very simple rules, ended up being a complex tree of tens 
or more rules, which have non obvious interdenpendencies and things 
like left entry recursions (I hope I make sense here) which are, 
well, slow(er) and hard to map in one's mind.

regexp should be shot

Max, could you flesh that out as a hypothetical example?

are you asking me to give an example?

Sure, how would it look?

well, I guess the best way would be to use parens within the parse 
block as a means to return if we should continue in this rule, (and 
maybe even based on type, how many items to skip!).

hum... you are asking my mind to shift from cgi and web site writing 
to parse rule generation.. hehe I'm a bit deep in the construction 
of Revault right now... with about 10 files opened and mapped in 
my mind ;-)

Fair enough -- just curious...

What Maxim is describing is the CHECK clause proposal I made a few 
years ago. See here:
http://www.colellachiara.com/soft/Misc/parse-rep.html

This collection was made last year, but I first proposed CHECK years 
ago (calling it IF at the time), for the previous round of proposals.

I'm working on reducing memory consumption on my little database 
and was wondering if stats is reading out the total memory usage 
correctly or if Windows XP's job list is. I can do a script that 
gradually eats up 100 MB memory and then the memory is recycled, 
when I ask for it. 'stats then prints about 15 MB used, which is 
fine, but the job list reads out about 100 MB still used and it stays 
there. Right now it reads about 104.656 KB used, while stats prints 
15588191 bytes. This is in a stopped console. Recycling more doesn't 
help.


I've even seen the job list memory jump up 10-20 MB once when recycling. 
Which one is reading out the correct number?

I think I get it. If I run the script again, the job list does not 
show memory usage to be above 104 MB until stats also show above 
104 MB. So Windows must be keeping inactive memory around for the 
task.

I've made a small change to the %filtered-import.r script -- it should 
now properly handle the 'opt modifier:

>> import [][test: opt string!]
== [test none]
>> import [test ""][test: opt string!]
== [test none]
>> import [test ""][test: string!]
== none

This last one could be considered unexpected?

I'm trying to learn how to make tcp servers, reading this rebol doc: 
file:///C:/SDK/docs/core23/rebolcore-13.html#section-14

Why am I getting this error:

>> listen: open tcp://:8001
** Access Error: Error opening socket listen port
** Near: listen: open tcp://:8001

Turning the firewall off does not help.

This seems to work:

>> listen: open tcp://localhost:8001

But the docs specifically say:


Notice that you do not supply a host name, only a port number. This 
type of port is called a listen port. The system now accepts connections 
on port number 8001.

Is this a mistake in the docs?

Henrik -- I think Gabriele said recently that REBOL *never* hands 
back memory to the opsys. So, although, REBOL's stats are reporting 
in-use memory, they are not telling you all the still reserved memory.
I think that explains your observations.

Lous:

your port  is already opened either by an opther application or by 
this rebol instance as you can connect to.

So either use an other port number or close your listen socket before 
opening again

sorry  Lous --> Louis

sunanda, I see, thanks

anyone else thinks this would be useful? 
reduce 'abc/'def/(1 + 2)
instead of
to path! reduce ['abc 'def (1 + 2)]

but you can't do
abc/'def/(1 + 2)
so maybe a new repath function:
repath abc/'def/(1 + 2)
?