World: r3wp

Another problem is, that this is valid XML:
<tag1>string 1<tag2>content</tag2>string 2</tag1>


If you made that to an object, how would to refer to "string 1" and 
"string 2"? So of course it's possible to make XML to REBOL objects, 
but then you have to make restrictions to what kind of XML, you can 
handle.

It's hard (maybe impossible) to come up with a solution, that can 
handle all XML.

is there a difference between valid xml and that which is in common 
use?

I don't know. My last example is probably not seen that often, but 
it's valid according to the XML specs.

as long as something covers 80% of the use cases ...

Maybe something can be made from the builtin REBOL parse-xml and 
xml-language?

rebelxml.r looks as though it will do what I need.

cool

http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=rebelxml.r&sid=jp963yh

Graham - I found Gavain's Mckenzie's scripts usefull some two years 
ago. I had also some chat with him, and it seems his work covers 
80% of usual programmer needs. You could build object with his code 
...

I've used Graham's code a lot --especially for hefting RSS files 
into REBOL format. It works well.

There's a HUGE difference between dealing with simple, well formed, 
XML, and trying to implement the XML specification. A good deal of 
XML our there is just well formed; no namespaces, no attributes; 
easy to deal with. I did a loading (XML to blocks) that just makes 
a minor change to parse-xml; it reverses the content and attribute 
values--since attributes are often NONE--so you can use path notation 
on the resulting block.

rebelxml seems to be working so far .. if it doesn't do, I'll look 
at Gavin's stuff again.

>> test: make object! [ a: b: none  c: make object! [ d: none]]
>>
>> obj: make test [ c/d: "testing"]
>> h: make test [ a: 1 ]
>> probe h
make object! [
    a: 1
    b: none
    c: make object! [
        d: "testing"
    ]
]

how come when I create a new test object, it has the same c object 
?  Shouldn't that be a new object as well?

No, when using MAKE, sub-objects are shared (functions are cloned). 
This is how sharing of feel objects is implemented when faces are 
cloned.

So, if you want to be sure to clone your object and every field, 
you will have to check every field to see if it is an object and 
clone it too.

that's a bit painful ... guess why I never used objects much before.

Yes, sharing is handy but not when you don't want it. :)

Quick hack, Graham:
test: make object! [ a: b: none  c: make object! [ d: none]]
obj: make first reduce load mold test [ c/d: "testing"]

x: [ 2 4 6 ]
y: [  x/1 ]

how do i get the value from y/1 ? I know this is perhpas very newbe 
but once every year I always run into this and can figure it out...

reduce y/1 gives me x/1 but I want 2.. Im missing somekind of  'eval 
y/1 ...

do y/1

no that gives me also x/1

it works fine here?

not here..

>> x: [ 1 2 3 ]
== [1 2 3]
>> y: [ x/1 ]
== [x/1]
>> do y/1
== x/1
>> x: [ 1 2 3 ]
== [1 2 3]
>> y: [ x/1 ]
== [x/1]
>> do y/1
== x/1

odd ...

>> x: [2 4 6]
== [2 4 6]
>> y: [ x/1 ]
== [x/1]
>> y/1
== x/1
>> do y/1
== 2

try a fresh console, I've done it successfully on mac with view 1.3.2 
and winXP with view 2.7.0

your kidding me... Could that be a problem ?

well, if some variable has been changed.

do on paths was added in 1.3.1 or something i think.

hmm... it could be that it evaluates as a path

mmm nope no effect ->
>> x: [ 2 4 6 ]
== [2 4 6]
>> y: [ x/1 ]
== [x/1]
>> y/1
== x/1
>> do y/1
== x/1
>>

rebolinth, system/version ?

REBOL/Core 2.5.6.4.2

use 2.6 :)

otherwise you need to  do y   or  do reduce [y/1]

Mmmmmmmm all that brain cracking the whole day .... in 2.6 its working...

Thanks...I finaly can finish my Brain-Game ;-)

Anyone built an xml to rebol object utility?

I'm talking about well formed xml, no attributes involved.

No matter, xml-to-object works fine.

Please do not run this in REBOL console. Instead I want you to tell 
me what you expect as a result:

unset 'a a/x: (a: 1x2 3)

i'd expect an error.

I would probably expect 'a/x to be 3

depends if it checks whether the path exists or not before the () 
part is evaluated

...and what you expect in case:

a: 1x2 a/x: (a: [x 4] 3)

or:

    a: 1x2 a/x: (unset 'a 3)

a = [x 3]