World: r3wp
[I'm new] Ask any question, and a helpful person will try to answer.
older newer | first last |
Will 14-Jun-2007 [540] | Perfect! thank you Maxim 8-) |
Maxim 14-Jun-2007 [541] | its fun to have easy questions some times (note: easy is not synonymous to obvious ;-) |
Will 14-Jun-2007 [542] | well, I've spent almost an hour trying to figure out.. next time I'll go stright to the dictionary! |
Maxim 14-Jun-2007 [543x3] | some functions are not names the same as in CS so even that sometimes leads you away from what you'd expect.... in this case the dash in the name prevented me from finding it in google for hours. |
names = named | |
and I knew it existed! | |
Geomol 14-Jun-2007 [546] | It sometimes help to find the right REBOL words by calling help with part of the word. Like: >> ? line >> ? new |
Luis 14-Jul-2007 [547] | . |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [548] | What is the best way to get an formatted timestamp that matches IBM DB2 in this form: ccyy-mm-dd-hh:mm:ss.nnnnnn I tried this, but I'm stuck on how to extract out the nanoseconds from Now/precise: Timestamp: rejoin [ now/year "-" now/month "-" now/day "-" now/time ".000000" ] Also, if the month or day is less than 2 digits, I need a leading zero -- how can I do this easily? |
Sunanda 17-Jul-2007 [549x2] | To get the seconds: third now/time/precise Use first, second, to get HH MM. Not sure it is nano-second precise! |
This adds leading zeroes to MM or DD -- you could use similar logic: http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=to-iso-8601-date.r | |
Henrik 17-Jul-2007 [551] | precision depends on the OS used, but millisecond precision is displayed always, AFAIK. |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [552] | I got the following when I did this: rejoin [now/year "-" now/month "-" now/day "-" now/time "." third now/time/precise "000" ] 2007-7-17-13:40:36.36.748000 which is pretty close, except the seconds are repeated again. |
Sunanda 17-Jul-2007 [553] | Try this: rejoin [now/year "-" now/month "-" now/day "-" first now/time "." second now/time "." thir d now/time/precise "000" ] But you may need to add some more trailing zeroes.... a time of 01:02:03.100 would show in REBOL as 1:2:3.1 |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [554] | That seems to work -- except for adding leading zeroes which can be done via above script -- Thanks Sunanda |
Gregg 17-Jul-2007 [555] | I have a format func that isn't on REBOL.org (yeah, I know...; it requires another func, etc.) if you have to do a lot of formats and don't want to roll them all. Anyway, let me know if you want me to send it Patrick. |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [556x2] | Sure -- Why not -- I'm learning more and more all the time |
OK -- I'm perplexed as to when does things get evaluated. If I have a variable like Now-TS: to get the formatted time, it will be resolved immediately and return the time. If later, after I wait 1 second, I want to print the new formatted timestamp, it returns the exact same value as before, when I know the time has acutally changed. How do I get the time now to be resolved again? Example code: print now/precise gives 17-Jul-2007/14:35:21.308-5:00 wait 1 print now/precise gives 17-Jul-2007/14:35:22.324-5:00 now/precise is evaluated immediately Now-timestamp: rejoin [ Now/year "-" Now/month "-" Now/day "-" first Now/time "." second Now/time "." third Now/time "000" ] print Now-timestamp gives 2007-7-17-14.35.22.0000 wait 1 print Now-timestamp gives 2007-7-17-14.35.22.0000 the exact same time -- not evaluated immediately Is it this way because Now-timestamp has been assigned and already evaluated -- if so, how do I have it reevaluate it again? | |
BrianH 17-Jul-2007 [558] | Wrap it in a function. now-timestamp: does [rejoin [...]] |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [559x2] | Ok, so if a variable is unset, then it is evaluated when defined. If it is already defined, then it is not evaluated again unless there is a do or does? Is that right? |
Super -- that worked just great | |
BrianH 17-Jul-2007 [561x4] | DOES is a shortcut for creating a function, DO evaluates its value directly. A variable is not evaluated when assigned - the value is, and then it is assigned to the variable. You don't really "define" variables in REBOL, but the distinction may be more complicated than you need to worry about for now. |
You might consider that the time will march on during the course of your evaluation, so you might want to store it in a local variable, like this: pad0: func [x n [integer!]] [head insert/dup (x: form :x) "0" (n - length? x)] now-timestamp: func [/local n] [n: now/precise rejoin [ pad0 n/1 4 "-" pad0 n/2 2 "-" pad0 n/3 2 "-" pad0 n/4 11 "000" ]] | |
Sorry, that won't work in some cases. Try this instead: now-timestamp: func [/local n s] [ n: now/precise s: n/4/3 s: join either s < 10 ["0"] [""] s: head insert/dup tail s "0" 9 - length? s rejoin [ pad0 n/1 4 "-" pad0 n/2 2 "-" pad0 n/3 2 "-" pad0 n/4/1 2 ":" pad0 n/4/2 2 ":" s ] ] | |
missing an s :( s: join either s < 10 ["0"] [""] s | |
PatrickP61 17-Jul-2007 [565x3] | Thanks Brian. I will play around with it a little more. Just to re-iterate my understanding of rebol assignments A variable is not evaluated when assigned - the value is, and then it is assigned to the variable. You don't really define" variables in REBOL" So at the time of assignment, the text following the : is assigned to the variable but is not evaluated. That is to say the variable is like a pointer to the text string that was typed in. Does that mean that Rebol will not do evaluations until it needs to. For example: In-file: %file_path_name.txt In-text: Read In-file write %out-file-path-name.txt In-text <-- this is where the evaluation occurs to resolve all the above? Is that right? |
Another similar example: In-file: %file_path_name.txt In-text: Read In-file append In-text 'this-is-the-end-of-the-file <-- evaluated because of action word append write %out-file-path-name.txt In-text | |
is that right? | |
BrianH 17-Jul-2007 [568x4] | That's not what I meant. I meant that the expression to the right of the set-word (s:) is evaluated. The result of that evaluation is the value that will be assigned to the word. So, you were right the first time about the evaluation order. |
The word itself is not evaluated though, it is just assigned. The value that the word was assigned is returned from the assignment expression too, so that you can chain assignments or use the value later, like I did in pad0 above. | |
Later on you can either do a full evaluation of the word by stating it directly ( a ) or you can just retrieve its value by using a get-word ( :a ). | |
REBOL variables don't really need to be declared, as such, but you do need to declare function parameters and object fields. Some of the REBOL language look like they are declaring variables, but they really are doing something different. | |
PatrickP61 18-Jul-2007 [572] | Thanks for your patience with me. I'm wrong about the evaluation. It is done at the time of the assignment returing whatever value to the variable. The reason Now-timestamp had identical values, even after waiting 1 second was that it was evaluated once, with a value put into it, then the wait happened, then I simply re-printed the same value as before, because I did not re-do the variable. I think I was making it harder than it really is. I don't understand this statment: Later on you can either do a full evaluation of the word by stating it directly ( a ) or you can just retrieve its value by using a get-word ( :a ) Are you saying that I can simply type Now-timestamp to have it re-evaluated at that time? |
btiffin 18-Jul-2007 [573x7] | Umm, not quite. You're getting into it now. :) Sometimes it helps to think of it this way (but it is actually 'deeper') myprint: print won't work, it tries to evaluate print, but myprint: :print "gets" the value of print and then you can myprint [1 2 3] - again it's deeper than what I just explained. |
a: 23 * 56 when interpreted will compute 23 * 56 then the set-word a: assigns the value 1288 to the variable a. Because it is just a number a and :a are both 1288, you can't really get at the 23 * 56 anymore, that expression has been evaluated and "forgotten", forgotten not really a good word, but the expression 23 * 56 is not around anymore, only the 1288. | |
Patrick; I just looked back a little bit, your question about formatted time-stamps...Chris has donated an awesome date time formatter to the rebol.org repository. Very close to strftime in function. Check out http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=form-date.r | |
form-date now/precise "%C%y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%S" doh! loses the precise, so... dt: now/precise t: dt/time rejoin [form-date dt "%C%y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%S" find form t/second "."] again, not quite right...the precision won't be right padded with zeros, one more step | |
dt: now/precise t: dt/time t: find form t/second "." rejoin [form-date dt "%C%y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%S" head change/part ".000000" t length? t] I think I'll bug Chris to add %P for precise padded seconds. :) | |
and of course head change/part COPY ".000000" ... if you reuse the sequence...It'd be nice to be able to just use form-date now/precise "%C%y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%P" | |
Patrick; Never mind for now...the %S is rounded, won't work. Sorry for the interruption. | |
PatrickP61 18-Jul-2007 [580] | btiffin -- Thank you for taking the time to explain it. I think I understand it now. I was initially confused because I tried to print a timestamp knowing full well that time is changing and I didn't understand how to get it evaluated. I confused the assignment of a value with that of a function.. Good info on the date timestamp above. Thank you all! |
Gregg 18-Jul-2007 [581x2] | If you read the Core manual on REBOL.com, it has a pretty good explanation of the four word types (normal, lit, set, and get). The other thing to understand is when blocks, and nested blocks, are reduced (evaluated). That can be tricky to figure out sometimes, because funcs like PRINT do it automatically. If you can get a handle on when things are evaluated--and don't stress when you have to add a REDUCE or COMPOSE but aren't sure why--and if you can grok the four word types, you 'll be in great shape. |
When getting started, you can quite often treat REBOL like many other languages; it has a nice facade to let you get a lot done that way without forcing you to understand how it really works. | |
btiffin 19-Jul-2007 [583] | rebol.org %form-date.r updated... Fix for time-stamps and a really nice short-cut that includes the zone. %c outputs all the fields of now/precise nicely formatted %s outputs the seconds with nanosecond precision nicely formatted form-date now/precise "%C%y-%m-%d-%H:%M:%s" is now all you need for IBM DB2 time-stamps. |
Graham 19-Jul-2007 [584] | javascript dates?? |
btiffin 19-Jul-2007 [585] | Whoey whatty? :) These are all zero-padded. Addition of the "%#H" type sequences wouldn't be too-too hard. |
Graham 19-Jul-2007 [586x2] | javascript dates are milliseconds since 1-Jan-1970 |
doing this in math causes a few problems! | |
btiffin 19-Jul-2007 [588x2] | We decided to use %s for REBOL precision...no epoch seconds in form-date. And yeah, I was looking at the TIME and NTP protocols...it would not be fun in high level REBOL, I don't think even Rebcode could poke the right fields for time! |
Moving to Library... | |
older newer | first last |