World: r3wp
[Parse] Discussion of PARSE dialect
older newer | first last |
Henrik 4-Mar-2008 [2420] | that depends entirely on how you build the block |
[unknown: 5] 4-Mar-2008 [2421x5] | Remember you don't know what is in the block as it might not be string!. |
I'm gonna have to work on this a bit - still seems like a cumbersome way | |
But it helps to know that as it gives me more options | |
I think I have a way around that. | |
Thanks Henrik. | |
Henrik 4-Mar-2008 [2426] | no problem |
BrianH 4-Mar-2008 [2427] | Keep in mind that you can parse for 'string! (the lit-word version of the word string!) and that will match without reducing. |
[unknown: 5] 4-Mar-2008 [2428x3] | Yes, thanks Brian. |
In my situation the lit-word and the mold/all methods are not ideal. | |
I can see where we need to add this capability to REBOL. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2431x2] | Pail, what exactly does the user input in the field? |
Paul :-) | |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2433x2] | They input a string followed by a datatype. For example: ["age" integer! "location" string!] |
The datatype entered will vary. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2435] | one way to deal with that would be to make your form so that it would not be possible to enter the data in a different way than the intended format, but that requires more form design of course. |
btiffin 5-Mar-2008 [2436] | Henrik's original hint and any-type! should catch them. parse ["age" integer! "loc" string!] [string! set the-type #[datatype! any-type!] (print ["got an " the-type]) string! #[datatype! any-type!]] |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2437x2] | Henrik that is ugly way to approach it. I feel were lacking a "better means" to handle this problem. |
Brian here is a problem with your stradegy: >> parse [1][set n #[datatype! any-type!]] == true Notice it returns true for the actual values that meet the datatype. Which is what I don't want. I need to know SPECIFICALLY if what was passed was integer! or string! or whatever. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2439] | well, how do you want it to automatically recognize the input as datatypes? the only other way around it is to keep them as words and make a datatype rule to detect words that look like a datatype. |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2440] | Henrik that was the problem I almost had to resort to. But hopefully you see the problem. We should come up with ANOTHER method for handling this problem that is more seemless. |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2441] | you can also simply parse each single word like that. you can be as exact as you want in the parser. |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2442] | Yes, I understand that but it defeats Carl's famous philosophy which is that simple things should be simple to do. |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2443] | parse data ['string! (do-this) | 'integer (do-that)] |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2444x4] | I currently have resorted to a different approach. |
Currently, I do something similiar to this: user passes dynamic data captures in a block: data: ["fname" string! "age" integer!] Then I do the following: data: next data forskip data 2 [poke data 1 load mold/all attempt [to-datatype data/1]] | |
then this: data: head data unless parse data [some [string! datatype!]][return "Syntax Error!"] | |
Uses the mold/all method you provided yesterday. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2448] | well, if that's all you do, you don't even have to convert it to a datatype, IMHO. it's enough to collect a list of rebol's datatypes as words, so they be used to trigger on the input word which looks like a datatype. I can see you are going for correctness, i.e. wanting the input to be a real datatype, but if you only use that input as a trigger to do something, you don't need to convert it to a real datatype. just operate using words. |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2449] | Yeah I even looked into going thru system/words and collecting all the datatype but the method I deployed was smaller and more effective. |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2450x3] | put weight in that dialects are words and if you take advantage of that, your dialect will become simpler |
all datatype words are stored in the 'datatypes word | |
woah, that was nonsense: "dialects are words" I meant "dialects consists of words and a few other things" | |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2453] | lol |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2454] | that means: if your datatype requires some level of serialization syntax to work, just consider them words. |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2455x2] | Would be nice to have something that simply says lit-type? |
except that this isn't exactly what I think of as being "lit" as we know it. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2457x2] | dialects are separate language domains where the normal rules of REBOL syntax don't necessarily apply.... about lit-type, then you need lit-object, lit-none, lit-whatever :-) |
the serialized syntax _is_ the solution to that problem. yes the syntax is a bit more cumbersome. | |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2459x2] | Maybe something like this is best solution: |
dlt-type?: func [w [word!]][ foreach item datatypes [if equal? to-word item w [return true]] false ] | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2461] | or perhaps: dlt-type?: func [w [word!]] [any [attempt [to-datatype w] false]] |
[unknown: 5] 5-Mar-2008 [2462x6] | Yeah which is what I use now. |
similiar anyway | |
More like this for my needs: | |
dlt-type?: func [w] [found? any [attempt [to-datatype w] false]] | |
drop the [word!] requirement from the argument and report true or false. | |
But that doesn't fill a rule block to be passed to parse which is my original intention but is still very useful. | |
Henrik 5-Mar-2008 [2468] | I'd still not bother with it :-) how many datatypes will you support? |
btiffin 5-Mar-2008 [2469] | Sorry, try [#[datatype! datatype!] that should restrict the match to only datatype values. |
older newer | first last |