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

World: r3wp

[I'm new] Ask any question, and a helpful person will try to answer.

Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1254x2]
Or of course you can use HELP or ?.
? o1
? o2
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1256]
Think I understand that
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1257]
Each word carries its binding with it. ie. a reference to an object. 
(or no object if it is unbound).
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1258]
Can you get problems if an  object gets bound to itself?
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1259x2]
An object is a container of word -> value pairs. When you ask for 
a word's value, the word's binding is checked to get the object.
An object cannot be bound to anything. Only words can be bound.
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1261]
Sorry that's what I meant 'Word'
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1262x2]
A word isn't really a binding target, so you can't bind a word to 
itself (or any other word.)
(BIND accepts a known-word argument. It is the *object* that the 
known-word is from, not the known-word itself, which is the target 
for the bind.)
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1264]
Right - the context it's from ????
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1265x2]
Correct. (context = object).
So my above example could be modified to:

	append code bind [my-word] in o3 'self


which is in fact how we used to have to do it, because BIND didn't 
have object! in list of accepted types for its known-word argument.
so these are all the same:
	append code bind [my-word] o3
	append code bind [my-word] in o3 'self
	append code bind [my-word] in o3 'my-word


(we would use the 'self word because it's in every object by default.)
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1267]
The order of execution throws me more than anytihing I would have 
had to do your code like this

code append bind(my-word etc)

I'm so used to starting with the item
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1268x2]
Are you an ex-forther or something ?
(sorry, don't mean to sound rude...)
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1270]
No VB, C'#  You tent to start with the object and then using . notation 
you tell it what action to take on it.
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1271]
Ah of course. Much better this way :)
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1272x2]
Rebol you say what you want to do then which object you want to do 
it to lol
As I said on my blog I'm just entering my second week of de-programming 
;-/
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1274]
.. rebol is like:   VSO = Verb Subject Object
VB, C# is like:   SVO = Subject Verb Object
and Yoda is :  OSV
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1275]
Yeah your mind get comfortable one way or the other - takes a lot 
of breaking
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1276x2]
So actually rebol is less like english in that respect. But actually 
english is crazy. It's better to have the verbs at the front.
Actually rebol has objects and path notation, so you SVO too.
eg.   ctx-text/unlight-text
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1278]
Yes that's where English is wierd for people to learn English say

Bus Station

Spanish say Station de Autobus 

perhaps i should Rebol in spanish ;-)
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1279]
If you think it would help :) I let you investigate and report your 
findings :)
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1280x2]
:)
Thanks for the help  Anton  brb
Anton
21-Jan-2008
[1282]
no prob
Gregg
21-Jan-2008
[1283x2]
You can use the same kind of notation in REBOL as you would in VB, 
but using / instead of .(dot). It's called path notation in REBOL, 
and is used many places (objects, path types, refinements, etc.). 
Sometimes it's easier or clearer to write things one way or the other.
Also, in VB there is the WITH statement (USING in C# I think). In 
REBOL, you can write your own like this:

with: func [object block] [
    if object [do bind/copy block in object 'self]
]
SteveT
21-Jan-2008
[1285]
Hi Gregg, yes I've used it a lot with refinements. Like I said I 
think French or Spanish speakers will think in the same order as 
Rebol ;-\
Gregg
21-Jan-2008
[1286]
>> obj: context [val: none prn: does [print val]]
>> with obj [val: 2  prn]
2
BrianH
21-Jan-2008
[1287]
Gregg, your code is more complex than it needs to be. Try this:

with: func [object [any-word! object! port!] block [block!]] [
    do bind/copy block object
]


This is unnecessary in R3, where you can use DO IN instead of WITH.
Gregg
21-Jan-2008
[1288x4]
Thanks!
Doesn't work on older versions of REBOL. Support for object came 
more recently.
Object as the known-word arg to BIND.
I might also have done mine the  way I did to support the case when 
an object is NONE. Can't recall for sure.
PeterWood
22-Jan-2008
[1292x2]
Henrik: I believe that Rebol does have real inheritance, it's just 
based on protoytpes not classes:

>> a: make object! [b: func[][print "I'm from object a"]]
>> c: make a []
>> c/b
I'm from object a
>> d: make a [e: func [][print "I'm an extension to a"]] 
>> d/e
I'm an extension to a
>> f: make d [b: func [][print "I'm not the one in a"]]
>> f/b
I'm not the one in a
This even gives an inefficent way of extending an object:

>> a: make object! [b: func[][print "I'm from object a"]]
>> a: make a [c: func[][print "My new method"]]
>> a/b
I'm from object a
>> a/c
My new method
SteveT
23-Jan-2008
[1294]
Hi All, In a list you have the 'first mylist/picked'  is this not 
available for 'choice' ?
Anton
23-Jan-2008
[1295x4]
Check   index? face/data.
Actually, there are access functions. So use get-face and set-face.
view layout [
	size 200x300
	ch: choice "one" "two" "three" [
		print [index? face/data mold face/data]
		probe get-face face
	]
]
Mmm.. set-face is not implemented fully. Use this:
	layout [my-choice: choice ...]
	set-face my-choice my-choice/text: "two"
(we have to update the face/text ourselves.)
SteveT
23-Jan-2008
[1299]
Hi Anton, sorry for slow rep, just drove to London. Sorry I asked 
the wrong question there. What I was after was the 'index' of the 
the item chosen!
Anton
24-Jan-2008
[1300]
No problem.
SteveT
25-Jan-2008
[1301]
Journal of a 'Newbie' by SteveT
-------------------------------------------

Hi all, second week of using Rebol. had to travel to London this 
week so you guy's have had less 'Noise' from me ;-/


Had some good help off Anton/Henrik with regard to trapping key-presses. 
I'm hoping that some of the properties (refinements) missing from 
R2 will be in R3 - things like forcing case..


I'm getting to grips with 'PARSE'  will be great if the proposed 
lecture comes off.


Still struggling with 'BIND' but  I think I've learned enough about 
PARSE, BIND, CONTEXT & DIALECTS, to start using some of these facilities 
in some apps.  Biggest lesson so far this week has been 'Don't use 
it just because it's there!'  Stepping back from some of the things 
I've tried have lead me to simplifying my app rather than achieving 
a complicated solution!

Happy trails...
SteveT
btiffin
25-Jan-2008
[1302]
Congrats Steve;  I didn't even look at BIND for, well umm, yet.  
:)   Don't learn too fast or I'll have to think about rewriting http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/art-display-article.r?article=lf019t
 Then again; that article uses Sunanda's rebol.org Mini Wiki (miki) 
feature so feel free to update it.  :)
SteveT
26-Jan-2008
[1303]
Hi Brian, that's brilliant !!  I said I wanted to get productive 
with REBOL by the end of January! But I didn't say which January 
- did I ;-/  


Think I'm entering level 5 !!!! I'm definately 'confused from Blackpool' 
 :)