World: r3wp

but Henrik's  :z:  has me puzzled here:

[a :z: d]: [1 [2 3] 4]

what would the above mean?  hehe

(in current form  of syntax)

and what is your :z: ?
a new datatype too, much more confusing to my mind

no :z already exists.   if z where a function, it returns the function 
itself, not its evaluation.

get words returns the content of the word without evaluating them.

i don't speak about that

but :z:

that is a new datatype, a GET-SET

ahhh... sorry, didn't see the last colon.

it already exists too!

no

it does in path notation.  its also silently ignored in the command 
line as long as the get-set word actually holds a word within  :-)

>> y: 'c
>> probe :y: func [][print "2"]
>> c

but it should assign the function to c... its logical actually.

in a path, it works though.

but in plain REBOL, it has to be a new datatype

the path evaluation use another one scheme

not, it should just do like in the path notation, get the value of 
the word, and set to that value .

n

no, the path evaluation scheme uses a string parser

a path is a string in memory

the rules are differents

I think I see what you mean when you say a new datatype...  yes, 
it would be a get-set word, but the path notation already makes it 
clear how that should work... and I've used it often

so semantically its nothing new.  but in the context of the above 
multi-assign, I concur that the meaning becomes a bit obscure.

yes but it's not transposable as-is in plain rebol

it has to be a new datatype

just as get-word and set-word are different datatypes.  this is just 
the combination of both actually, code wise, its probably a one hour 
affaire for Carl, maybe even less.

if he thinks it's valuable, i think it's easy to do too

posted a note about it in R3 chat... just to see his reaction  :-)

a: [x y]
b: 'a
:b: [22 33]
== x: 22
== y: 33

probably a flame :)

hehe

Geomol, I wrote MAP-EACH and APPLY functions for R2/Forward - both 
required code generation by the function.

Pekr, your disdain of install and user directories will fail on systems 
that are locked down for corporate or public use - too insecure.

Steeve, Maxim, you guys are hilarious :)

not deliberate

The compliment stands :)

A path is not a string in memory, btw. It's more like a block.

well, i only said that without knowing the true truth, only to gain 
a victory against Maxim

HAHAHA

The string parsing is done at LOAD time. Keep fighting :)

spoken like a true french would...

if you can't beat him... lie!    ;-p

Usually it works

(for the record... I'm french speaking too :-)

So you would know :)

(ithough,  was right on the specific evaluation scheme)

americans exaggerate, we just invent stuff... its more fun... hehehe 
 but we all lie  !  ;-D

Yeah, it's still parsed, but it's block-parsed instead of string-parsed.

so it's a mid-lie

half a truth is no truth AT ALL !!!!

I prefer to think that I deduce and induce, rather than lie :)