World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [826] | (I am using PSPad, but wanted to give a try to SciTE) |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [827] | Sure. I prefer Notepad++ but it doesn't have REBOL enabled as a language. What's with the IN patch? |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [828] | in later version the IN function didn't accept any-word as argument |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [829] | It seems to here, 1.3.2.3.1 |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [830] | sorry, I wanted to say, in older versions of interpreter |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [831x4] | Here's a good installer for SciTE on Windows: http://gisdeveloper.tripod.com/scite.html |
I've been meaning to improve SciTE's REBOL support, but I'm waiting to see what changes REBOL 3 will bring. | |
After that I can hack Notepad++ to add the support there too. | |
One of your examples is wrong: build [only reduce [3 * 4 5 + 6]] ; == [[12 11]] | |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [835x3] | testing |
aha, yes, missing block brackets | |
example result corrected | |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [838] | Well, this has been fun, but I must go for now. I look forward to future collaborations :) |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [839] | thanks |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [840] | 3 new entries in the blog |
Geomol 2-May-2006 [841] | Henrik, good suggestion with the loop working on more than one series (in your reply to Carl's blog). That must be possible with a function definition. But it should probably be part of REBOL, at least a mezzanine. |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [842x2] | I realized that it's not possible with FOREACH since it would need to know the difference between two and three blocks as input (don't know if a refinement would take care of that) |
but I use this a lot and it would make it easier to interlace many blocks this way | |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [844] | A new mezz, formany perhaps? |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [845] | I got another idea. Please see the blog. |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [846] | Henrik, try to implement your ideas in REBOL code. Post it to AltME if you need help. Let us hash out the details, improve it. If it turns out well, it could become a mezzanine function. |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [847] | alrighty then |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [848] | Someone mentioned Ladislav's build dialect, and look what happened to it... ;-) |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [849] | haven't even followed it, but it seems that Carl likes it |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [850] | noone remembers my nforeach function? :) |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [851] | I think Carl was talking about his Include. I meant Ladislav mentioning the build dialect yesterday in this group and me suggesting bug fixes immediately. It's a little better than it was before as a result. Sometimes it seems that the best REBOL optimizer is its community showing off. |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [852] | explain? |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [853] | Yes, demonstrate? |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [854x3] | well, anyway, carl's foreach already does what henrik is asking for. |
my nforeach took a different approach, that is nforeach [c1 a c2 b] [...] | |
r3's one will probably be foreach [[c1] [c2]] [a b] [...] | |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [857] | Carl's foreach as in the one in R3? surely not the one in R2 |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [858] | yes, r3 |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [859x2] | that's good! |
I won't waste my time then :-) | |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [861x2] | i don't know if we're going to have your suggested loop or pad refiniments |
but, note that it is very likely that foreach will be a mezz, so we you can improve on it :) | |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [863] | pad and loop are sort of gimmicks anyway. I think the multiple block part is the important thing. |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [864] | funny, i thought i was the only one wanting multiple blocks. |
Henrik 2-May-2006 [865x2] | I really miss it alot |
such a construct would make certain loops much simpler | |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [867] | When you combine this with the word, set-word trick, this could make for some interesting structure matching. |
Gabriele 2-May-2006 [868] | ah, about structure matching... let me switch to another group |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [869] | Sure, as long as it's fast, make it a mezz and let it evolve. |
Ladislav 2-May-2006 [870x3] | Someone mentioned Ladislav's build dialect, and look what happened to it... ;-) - it was me who mentioned it, but this is about the third time I mentioned it here as well as on the ML, so it is not as efficient as Brian suggests :-) |
I posted a comment to hash that contains the reason why Carl is reconsidering the HASH! datatype | |
re the BUILD issue - it has been used quite regularly, although not for lit-paths, because they are "rare" in a sense | |
BrianH 2-May-2006 [873] | Well I was joking, but yeah, the community-as-optimization does depend on the community having time and attention to spare... |
Ladislav 3-May-2006 [874] | Brian, you mentioned the usage of HASH! as an index. That is exactly the case (IMO) when HASH! is better than associative array. Are you using that often? |
BrianH 3-May-2006 [875] | Sometimes I return a hash index as a query result set, for database-like functions. If I had to use an assoc instead I'm sure it would be fine as long as select was still O(1) like a hash. |
older newer | first last |