World: r3wp

I don't know much about it, I just remember that path evaluation 
has changed with some R2 version - from more to less "aggressive" 
... does it for e.g. mean, that with earlier versions of R2, it was 
possible?

Ok, so now let's make it bit more complicated :)

I have the a object and  for example
>> p: make path! [b c]
and I need something like
>> do bind [p] a
== 1

do bind reduce [p] a

or,
>> do head insert p 'a

:-) ... amazing :-)

(i'm sorry for such a newbie questions, but I'm ill and my brain 
refuses to work :-)

...does it for e.g. mean, that with earlier versions of R2, it was 
possible?...
 - no, it is possible in R3

jdishun (and other fans of named functions) - check http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=named-func.r

That's nice, finally something to point to when that question comes 
up again.

ah, those named functions are brilliant

maybe we should add special handling to bind so that each function 
is automatically passed a handle to refer to itself

we could call it ..... self!

/apr1

:-D

:)

NAMED-FUNC is excellent though. A great REBOL example. Thanks for 
doing that Ladislav.

Rebolek couldn't you have done this in your first example:
>> a/b/c
== 1

No no no. It's again the rules. You have to find the weirdest way.

Ahhh...

Is there is better way to code the following idiom:

	foreach [from to] [
		"&" "&"
		"<" "&lt;"
		">" "&gt;"
		"^/" "<br>"
	][
		replace/all string from to
	]

I'm using this much too frequently for my own liking ;)

there are faster algorythms, if you are managing very large files, 
but they require a bit more code and/or use of parse.

still, replace is pretty fast... I don't know if the parse approach 
will be faster with only 4 items to replace.

then again, if your source string has many of the origin ("from") 
strings the parse could still be faster... I guess it largely depends 
on the size and shape of the data you are manipulating.

Steeve :))

Paul - no. The object is anonymous and I know only the b/c part.

Ashley, I've done parse-based REPLACE funcs, and a simple TRANSLATE 
func, but I haven't generalized and dialected them the way I want 
to either. This week is busy for me, but if you want to collaborate 
on something, let me know. I think it would have a lot of value.

I use a variant of this:

sanitize: use [chars encode][
	chars: complement charset {&<>"}
	encode: func [txt chr][change/part txt chr 1]
	
	func [text [any-string!]][
		parse/all copy text [
			copy text any [
				text: some chars
				| #"&" (text: encode text "&amp;") :text
				| #"<" (text: encode text "&lt;") :text
				| #">" (text: encode text "&gt;") :text
				| #"^"" (text: encode text "&quot;") :text
			]
		]
		any [text ""]
	]
]

Provides a bit of scope for expansion...

Though it's admittedly bigger...

Well... I use this: http://www.rebol.it/power-mezz/mezz/text-encoding.html
:-)

exists? in R2 seems to ignore a traling slash on a file name. I have 
found that it returns true for a non-existant directory if there 
happens to be a file of the same name. Read does not giving the following 
results:

>> write %test "testfile"
>> if exists? %test/ [read %test/

]
** Access Error: Cannot open /Users/peter/WebSites/public_html/IT-Matters-Consulting/test/

** Near: read %test/

This seems like a bug to me. Should I add it to Rambo?

The root of the problem appears to be that make port! creates a valid 
port object! with a non-existant path (but syntatically valid)  with 
an empty target (filename)  of %"".  Using query against such a post 
adds a state object to the port object. Exists? uses the existance 
of a state object in the port object to determine the existance of 
the file or not.

I should have written "status" object not "state" object above.

In R3, dir? returns true for a non-existant directory if the file! 
supplied ends with a /. This is the opposite from R2 but is it correct 
to do so?

non-existant -> non-existent

old persistent debate :)

A non-parse solution (for the replace problem) based on the existing 
replace mezz:

replace-each: make function! [
	target [series!] "Series that is being modified"
	values [block!] "Block of search/replace strings"
	/local len pos
][
	foreach [search replace] values [
		len: length? search
		while [pos: find target search] [
			target: change/part pos replace len 
		]
	]
]

Peter, R3's behavior with DIR? and EXISTS has already been reported 
and not fixed yet. Fixing R2 is unlikely, for compatibility.

Anyone still has REBOL 1.x binaries around?

I collected them from 0.7 alfa release or so, but lost my HD :-(

I used to have 1.0.3.3.1, though I'll have to check previous computers 
to find it.

Would be great if you had a look, if you ever stumble across those 
machines :) 1.0.3 would be great.

would be great + would be great = twice as good! :)

what are you collecting them for?

Typo in the code above:

	target: change -> change

A new idea for the Bindology article enhancement: for a given BLOCK 
and CONTEXT find out, whether the block is in the given context or 
not. Do you think, that such a function might be interesting?

Absolutely.

:-)

Blocks aren't bound to anything; their contents are. You could check 
whether the block contains any words bound to a context though.

words only

I'm sure that's what he meant.

The idea was a bit different: there is the¨