World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16892] | and what is your :z: ? a new datatype too, much more confusing to my mind |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16893x2] | 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. | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16895x3] | i don't speak about that |
but :z: | |
that is a new datatype, a GET-SET | |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16898x2] | ahhh... sorry, didn't see the last colon. |
it already exists too! | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16900] | no |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16901x3] | 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. | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16904x2] | but in plain REBOL, it has to be a new datatype |
the path evaluation use another one scheme | |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16906] | not, it should just do like in the path notation, get the value of the word, and set to that value . |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16907x4] | n |
no, the path evaluation scheme uses a string parser | |
a path is a string in memory | |
the rules are differents | |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16911x2] | 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. | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16913x2] | yes but it's not transposable as-is in plain rebol |
it has to be a new datatype | |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16915] | 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. |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16916] | if he thinks it's valuable, i think it's easy to do too |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16917x2] | 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 | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16919] | probably a flame :) |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16920] | hehe |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16921x3] | 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 :) | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16924] | not deliberate |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16925x2] | The compliment stands :) |
A path is not a string in memory, btw. It's more like a block. | |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16927] | well, i only said that without knowing the true truth, only to gain a victory against Maxim |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16928] | HAHAHA |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16929] | The string parsing is done at LOAD time. Keep fighting :) |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16930] | spoken like a true french would... if you can't beat him... lie! ;-p |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16931] | Usually it works |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16932] | (for the record... I'm french speaking too :-) |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16933] | So you would know :) |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16934] | (ithough, was right on the specific evaluation scheme) |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16935] | americans exaggerate, we just invent stuff... its more fun... hehehe but we all lie ! ;-D |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16936] | Yeah, it's still parsed, but it's block-parsed instead of string-parsed. |
Steeve 21-Aug-2009 [16937] | so it's a mid-lie |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16938] | half a truth is no truth AT ALL !!!! |
BrianH 21-Aug-2009 [16939] | I prefer to think that I deduce and induce, rather than lie :) |
Maxim 21-Aug-2009 [16940x2] | assuming is just lying with a good case! |
;-) | |
older newer | first last |