World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9080] | It can't |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9081] | *decision* ok, can you explain why or give an example, that clearly show it? |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9082] | The above list example proves, that lists don't "know" their index, and have to calculate it every time, which means, that "index access" is slow. |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9083] | I think, this is only a problem with blocks, if you insert a later position earlier in the same block. |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9084] | As opposed to that, blocks are designed for fast index access, so they have to "know" it, which means, that INSERT cannot change it |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9085x2] | I don't think, INSERT have to change position of some index, it just have to insert the next position than the one given, and only if insert is earlier in the same series. |
I can't see, it shouldn't work. But we'll see... | |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9087x3] | I don't think, INSERT have to change position of some index - that formulation does not make sense to me |
index is a number | |
the one obtained using the INDEX? function | |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9090] | I read you, as INSERT cannot change an index. I say, INSERT should just add 1 to the index number, it receives, and only in that special case. |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9091x2] | INSERT cannot do such a "harakiri" |
how could it? | |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9093] | :) |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9094x3] | just realize, that index is a number, and every blocks remembers it |
if it did not, it would have to calculate it every time | |
and, since the index attribute is immutable, in fact, the INDEX function cannot change it | |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9097] | I'm not talking about calculating every time and changing of indexes being hold by variables and such. I only suggest, that INSERT does this: If /only and if value being inserted is an index (or position or what we should call it) later in the same series, where we are inserting, add 1 to the index value and insert that. In all other cases carrie on as usual. |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9098] | THat is nonsense, it would be incompatible with the above example I wrote |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9099] | I'm sorry, if it doesn't make sense. I sometimes find it easy to figure out such solutions but very difficult to explain it to others. :) I'll just go and implement it myself. |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9100x2] | You need to realize, that "insert/only a block into a block with the same head" has to be compatible with "insert/only a block into a block with distinct head" |
Otherwise you are asking for any kind of trouble you can invent. | |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9102] | sure, and it's possible to test for that. |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9103] | Well, the only thing I can suggest you is to try it and see which incompatibilities you get. |
Andreas 7-Jun-2011 [9104x3] | Geomol, refering to your example above: >> s: [a b c d e f g h] == [a b c d e f g h] >> p: find s 'd == [d e f g h] >> insert s 42 == [a b c d e f g h] >> p == [c d e f g h] |
Extending this to your insert/only observation, the behaviour is perfectly consistent. | |
Whereas with your awful proposed insert/only-hack, it would not. | |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9107] | I see no problem with your example. I'm surprised, you find my suggestion "awful". What's awful about this: >> s: [a b c d e f g h] == [a b c d e f g h] >> p: find s 'd == [d e f g h] >> insert/only s p == .... >> s/1 == [d e f g h] >> p == [c d e f g h] |
Kaj 7-Jun-2011 [9108] | John, remember our previous discussion, that indexes are not properties of series, but properties of series references. Therefore, it makes no sense to try to make a vector behave like a list, because any other references to the vector are unknown and thus it's impossible to make the behaviour for those references consistent |
Ladislav 7-Jun-2011 [9109] | The awful property is as follows: s: [a b c d e f g h] t: [a b c d e f g h] p: find s 'd insert/only s p insert/only t p same? first s p ; == false ! same? first t p ; == true |
Geomol 7-Jun-2011 [9110] | That's a strong point! |
Robert 10-Jun-2011 [9111x4] | I'm really wondering what's up with Carl. |
If he shows up (maybe once every 6-8 weeks) only for 1-2 minutes... | |
If he lost faith in Rebol-3? | |
And, I don't understand why he can't be reached. All available channels are dead... | |
Kaj 10-Jun-2011 [9115] | Probably trying to build a big antenna to phone home |
GrahamC 10-Jun-2011 [9116] | Doesn't he have a phone? Or did he give away his iphone? |
james_nak 11-Jun-2011 [9117] | So Robert, you also haven't been in contact with him? I thought he was working with you all this time. Hmmm. |
Henrik 11-Jun-2011 [9118] | Last spotted this tuesday in the RM Asset world, but no feedback so far. |
GiuseppeC 11-Jun-2011 [9119] | Robert I have the same questions you have. Carl must acknoledge that our life and companies are waiting for him. |
Pekr 13-Jun-2011 [9120] | This is by far the longest period of Carl's disappearance, IIRC. The reasons we can only speculate about - some personal/family difficulcies, burn-out to the REBOL topic, new daily job, which does not left you with much energy and free time to do some other stuff, REBOL related. We tried to get Carl's answer on R3 Chat, only with sporadic answer of recent Carl's job. But no answers to "what's next" for the REBOL. The reasons might be various again - Carl is willing to proceed, he just dosn't have time/energy. He is most probably not willing to open-source the project either, which gets us into kind of schizophrenic situation - no open-source, no progress either. If Carl would know the answer to what's next for REBOL question, he would already share it with us. But he did not do so, yet, which is a bit disappointing of course. As for a phone call - I don't know - I would not call him, as it could get him into feeling, that we push him to give us an answer, which he might not have right now. But - I think that call from some friend, e.g. Reichart, would be accepted differently. But then - we can't push anyone to do anything, and from few weeks old discussion I think that Reichart does not necessarily feel urge to do such a thing, which is OK too. So ... we wait ... and RED progresses at least, so hopefully in the end, there is still the chance that we will see the light in the end of the tunnel :-) |
nve 13-Jun-2011 [9121] | Let's focus on Red and Cheyenne now. |
Endo 14-Jun-2011 [9122] | And let's hope Carl and his family are alright. No illness no accident. |
Henrik 14-Jun-2011 [9123] | Got a note this morning: They are fine... but that is the news that can be publicised for now. :-) |
Endo 14-Jun-2011 [9124] | Ok. Thank you Henrik. |
Pekr 14-Jun-2011 [9125] | Thanks Henrik. |
Ladislav 14-Jun-2011 [9126] | Wow, what a generous dose of speculations from Pekr! |
Pekr 14-Jun-2011 [9127] | That's what I was paid for at Amiga Review - to write monthly column of speculations about the behind-the-scenes stuff related to Amiga. Some even called such speculation being an insight, and it was rather popular :-) |
james_nak 14-Jun-2011 [9128] | Thanks Henrk. |
Kaj 14-Jun-2011 [9129] | There are very easy ways for business owners to prevent a number of classes of speculations |
older newer | first last |