World: r3wp

yes... you can make it in R2 using index: [1 2 3]  and for R3 you 
just replace:  index: make vector! [integer! 24 [1 2 3]]

Now as for compressing the dictionary.. it seems that smaller strings 
grow with compression?

>> a: compress "a"
== #{789C4B04000062006201000000}

>> a: compress "aaaa"
== #{789C4B4C4C4C040003CE018504000000}
>> a: compress "aaaaa"
== #{789C4B4C04020005B401E605000000}

compress is uzing zlib compression... just insetad of checksum at 
the tail (last 4 bytes) is used size of the source string

the size is used to make a result buffer for decompress:
>> decompress rejoin [#{789C4B4C} #{04020005B401E6} #{00000000}]
** Script Error: Not enough memory
>> decompress rejoin [#{789C4B4C} #{04020005B401E6} #{FF000000}]
== "aaaaa"

Terry, your 'integer-to-3-byte-binary conversion function is dependent 
on platform endianness (third struct! gives you an endian-dependent 
result), watch out for that.

You can blame me for that, I wrote it quickly.

Terminology question;  I know I could probably RTFM, but sometimes

Ask A Friendly Human is more fun.  What is the correct terminology 
for the global

REBOL context.  I'm describing (or trying to at least) the parse 
dialect "copy" versus

the REBOL "copy".  Is there a one word term for the "no context" 
context?  Or is
the REBOL global namespace
 good enough (and not too confusing to new rebols)?

Yeah, we all call it the global context.

Thanks Anton.

Is there a function which can flat a block. For example,
>> FLAT [ 1 2 [ 3 4 ] 5 6 ]
== [ 1 2 3 4 5 6]

probably not what you want ...

>> to-block form  [ 1 2 [ 3 4 ] 5 6 ]
== [1 2 3 4 5 6]

flatten: func [block [any-block!]][

    parse block [

         any [block: any-block! (change/part block first block 1) :block | 
         skip]

    ]
 
   head block
]

and with greater speed but less accuracy:
>> load form [1 2 [3 4] 5 6]

and now I should of course have read what Graham posted...

Don't assume that the parse is slow - you may be surprised.

Yes, and I wouldn't recommend the LOAD FORM way, it looks too brittle.

does SORT/COMPARE not work in combination with /SKIP? it seems to 
happily ignore /SKIP here.

seems that using /ALL does not help.

>> b: [1 2 3 4 5  5 4 3 2 1  7 6 5 4 3  3 4 5 6 7]
== [1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 5 4 3 3 4 5 6 7]
>> bb: sort/compare/skip copy b 2 5
== [1 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 7 6 5 4 3]
>> bb: sort/compare/skip copy b 4 5
== [5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 7 6 5 4 3 3 4 5 6 7]

what if the record size is 2, consists of a binary and an object 
and you want to sort on a value in the object?

Here's one way -- though it assumes (for simplicity) that the binary 
is a string of equal length in all keys:


data: reduce ["z" make object! [key: 1] "y" make object! [key: 2] 
"z" make object! [key: 2]]
sort/all/skip/compare  data 2 func [a b][
     return (join a/1 a/2/key) < (join b/1 b/2/key)
    ]
probe data

hmm... funny, I did exactly that code, but it would never recognize 
the b object in the compare function. will have to try again...

oh wait a minute. I see now :-)

I guess I don't after all. I still can't get it to recognize 'b. 
If I try to probe 'b inside the function, sorting just stops. probing 
'a works fine.

and the block checks out fine. it is properly arranged.

found the bug. (and I need more coffee)

There were problems with using all three refinements [ /all/compare/skip 
] together in earlier versions of REBOL. I believe they are fixed 
now.

I think the compare feature is just a bit underdocumented.

Script error: REPLACE has no refinement called ONLY

I can use CHANGE/ONLY FIND ...
What do you think, skould I RAMBO it as a wish?

rebolek, yeah, I think it would make sense to have that.

It's mezanine, so I'll try to figure out some fix and post it.

cool

Hm, was easier than I thought :))

Posted

>> regexp "[hello-:-world-:-re]" "[a-z0-9._%-]+@[a-z0-9.-]+\.[a-z]{2,4}"
== true
;))

Anyone else want a regex compiler that generates parse rules? Semantically, 
regex is a (very) limited subset of parse so it shouldn't bee too 
hard.

I working on it right now. the above example is copied from console

some things are not implemented yet and there some small problems 
but I hope I can solve them

I was looking for something, but nothing seems to exist. So I started 
mine, I'll release some first version soon.

http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=like.r

The reason that regex compilers for REBOL are rare is that parse 
is more powerful than regex, and most people who start trying to 
implement regex usually learn enough about parse during the course 
of doing so that they switch to using parse instead :)

Still, if you want help, a tester or a second opinion, post your 
code on the Parse group and we will optimize it for you.

It's funny, there's no better optimizer than the members of this 
world trying to show off and one-up each other :)

I love this community. One of my favorite things is the ML threads 
that optimize code and bring out different perspectives on design.

Hey... what's the code to prevent  the security from popping up in 
windows?  added -s to a shortcut, but not working?

-s should work...

in 98% of cases I agree with what Brian just said about Parse being 
more powerfull than Regexp.  but in those 2% regexp is SO much more 
powerfull, that it still has its place.   now some of you will ask 
me to say when or why, (I know how we as rebolers think and like 
to challenge each other ;-)  but I cannot give an exact example, 
but having had to implement a few complex systems in both, I remember 
a few times in parse when I'd remember how a single char would replace 
2-3 lines of parse "tricks".