World: r3wp

as a writer lol ofcourse ...

but yes that will be a need to be on wiki R3 .. but before talking 
on what is not official can we talk about what is official and already 
wait for us to use it since so many years ?

graham even if from taht wor then you write a book on parse and become 
billionare I won't be annoyed by that hahaha (if that's the case 
I and the other writers would gladly appreciate you to send us a 
plane to ticket to visit you graham :P)

any people that want to explain what he understoud from parse should 
be able to write it somewhere and have other people contribute to 
it well in my particular case that will end fast lol i'm not a parse 
guru i'm just a rebol coder willing to understand parse and use it 
the more often possible in all my projects.

i recognise i have been lazy and skipping the pain to understand 
parse too much time...

we can live without parse yes .... but then we have post from Carl 
saying that the rebol community is coding in rebol like they could 
code in any other language and skippping the most part of interrest 
of coding in rebol... and yes i'm not against that remark that's 
completly true. what interrest me is how can we promote the use of 
parse and how can we give back to parse use and dialects conception 
the  central place they deserve ?

many answers to that goal can be provided, make parse more friendly 
? write documentation about parse ? providing other point of entry 
to parse comming from other more "fun" technologies like a VID face 
using parse rules to draw on screen ritch text ? 


And why not using all of those possible solutions to this problem 
?

Another thing that annoys me ... don't take it as a personal attack 
okay that's just what i saw in 6 years of being part of rebol community. 


We provide our community tools to exchange information (altme, chat, 
forums etc...) people come with their problems they obtain an answer 
and then what ? the answer is lost in the flaw of talking and no 
one remembers them. then time later another guy come with the same 
problem obtain the same reply and the reply again is lost in the 
wind. 


The purpose of documentation is offering a way to answer the most 
basic problems and for harder problems one never though about then 
we use forums, altme, chat etc  and then this problem is backuped 
cleaned and organised into a cookbook will say sunanda or a detailled 
any level documentation i would say.

this way we will give the next step to the people initially interrested 
by rebol but letting it appart because progressing in it once you 
get the basis way to work become a hell path.

the wikibook is on wikipedia ... not Rebol's sites ....

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/REBOL_Programming/Language_Features/Parse

We started a couple of years ago writing this .. but ran out of steam 
:(

yeah i'm ready it ..

that's complete but it's missing a human dimension to that documentation 
i mean i read it and i'm still not able to do what i want to do ....

but yeah lot of good ideas in that documentation .... I like the 
progression  u do

Multiple authors ...

that's the same progressing angle i choose to explain what is a rule 
if you look my doc

I see a lot of Ladislav's work there :)

you is plural too :P

you is plural, u is singular :)

if you want i speak to you in french we french have a more noticeable 
way to use you in plural :P

Anyway, you are welcome to change things .. the book is a work in 
progress.

good basis to start a true documentation will make people speak with 
parse and knows all about it

ok book marked and i will see what i can do with that

running out of steam well so many things where oneshot intent in 
rebol community ...

we should all be like the terminator and have a shielded nuclear 
power source ....

hihihi hum ... no because nuclear thing hurts the planet ...

there is so many interresting aspect in rebol than focusing on only 
one and going to the extend of it is really hard ...

How's the collaborative editor going?

but rebolution can't come if it don't bring freedom with it isn't 
it ?

graham i thought your irc was to handle that kind of conversation 
lol

well since i'm stuck with parse .... it's not going at all

if you hit metal and shape it you are a blacksmith if you hit parse 
and shape your code you are a reboler :P

i like the idea of building a colaborativ editor around irc and vid 
i find the cross of both technologies reallly interresting...  but 
the bound to those technologies have to be parse parse parse and 
only parse

if i make another compse and if find based project steeve is going 
to kill me :P

ok i'm leaving to bed see u

bye

Shadwolf, I think you'll get a lot of agreement about the doc situation, 
but the REBOL community has never reached critical mass. Also, REBOLers 
tend to roll their own. That's partly due to REBOL not having support 
for PitL (e.g. modules), but also a mindset.

shadwolf. REBOL dialects are by definitions BLOCK parsing dialects. 
 ypu fail to mention that there is block parsing in the document 
you started.

maxim no i  called it the block rule and i made a section dedicated 
to dialect


So waht i will put in the block rule that  is different than a dialact 
...

in the block rule i will explain the big lines and then i will try 
to apply those consepts to build a simple dialect that i will comment 
.

and as that's the most difficult part i don't really undersand it 
 so we will see any help is welcome anyway.

for me and that's probably a noob though becasuse i'm not a guru... 
but none rule and string rule avec  almost the same effect isolating 
and spliting items of a string and arranging it into a returned block!


but yes the bigest part will be to explain the block rule the parse 
in a  block rule instructions
(copy at thru to etc...)

i will have to explain any some end newline all those kind of things 
that annimate parse and make it completly another thing compared 
to regular expression

Gregg well ... i'm not against contributing but I think one of the 
good way is for lower ranked programmer to express their problems 
and try to construct a doc helped by gurus to answers their ask then 
if it's readable and understandable by me I assum anyone could understand 
it 

My point is once people end rading the doc they will say "yeah i 
understoud what it's all about so now lets play with parse :P" if 
that only goal can be achieve I think a big step will be done.

and parse is something I really want to use in extensiv ways and 
if in the process i can acquiere enough knowledge and sahre it then 
we will all benefit from that

shadwolf... just found this nice little tutorial...  :-)

http://compsci.ca/v3/viewtopic.php?t=17706

Can anyone explain the error indicated in the last comment?

You should define a complement to spaces and then change the parse 
rule to copy the complementary characters.

The changed rule has

	copy varb to spaces


Note: that's *to* spaces, not *thru* spaces. That is, the spaces 
are not consumed like they were in the previous rule.
If you have a rule

	spaces

then those spaces will be consumed.
If you have a rule

	to spaces


then the parse index will be moved to the head of those spaces, so 
the spaces themselves will not be consumed.

So if you want the spaces also to be consumed (the parse index to 
be advanced through them), then you need a rule:

	to spaces spaces

That's right, you have to repeat yourself a little bit.

So the fixed version of the broken rule from the article should be:

	rule: ["a" spaces copy varb to spaces spaces "c"]

(Feel free to post this answer to the article.)