World: r3wp

Isnt 'switch exactly that, a reversed "do select"? i use 'select 
on variables, not blocks. then it is
> select data face/text

About english, "Find in the kitchen a pot" is ugly, but "look in 
the kitchen for a pot"?

It's poetic :-)

volker, that was the point I was making with FIND

That was why i was citing it :)

but i would argue more about the word "find" than the order of arguments. 
But maybe i am to used to "target first"?

(or is "look in" as ugly? Not native speaker..)

look in

 seems to be correct enough. I'm just used to finding the pot in the 
 kitchen, not finding in the kitchen a pot, thus I usually swap the 
 function arguments by mistake.

Technically it could work, if 'in would put its argument in front 
of the last call

> find pot in kitchen ; Kitchen would be passed as first argument 
now.
would be the same as 
> find kitchen pot
(sadly 'in is not available, and maybe its to biga hack?)

find pot @ kitchen ;?

Grabriele, Maybe  that is that actions only dispatch on the first 
argument. Has there been any talk of multimethods.  So far the only 
way to have native polymorphism is thrue ports. I wish rebol implemented 
multi-methods.

for those who want RSS feed for Rebol3 blogs, Carl has updated it.

http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/rebol3-rss.xml

Jaime, could you please voice your multimethod request to blog comments 
section? I think that Carl is not checking Altme here anymore .....

Pity we can't take the comments and inject them into here.

the fragmentation of information is just increasing.

anyone know why the priorities of +, - and *, / are swapped. This 
is a little annoying, I think.

henrik, there are no priorities.

oh well, but it still forces you to rethink your expressions

jaime, i don't think multimethods have been discussed for r3. they 
would be nice... but really only if we get custom datatypes too.

a tend to agree with you, but some people say that priorities force 
them to rethink their expressions...

so, in the end, no rule is easier to remember than some rules, thus 
i got to like the rebol way.

you should be able to find my old eval function to eval (and compile) 
math expressions with priorities and so on.

(was posted to ml many years ago, some archive should have it)

It's explain in the doc : priority go from left to right, nothing 
more. The rule is different than the mathematical one we used to 
use. But it's also a "simple" rule, easy to remember.
So, 
>> 3 + 2 * 5
== 25

gabriele: luckily, Brett had a copy:

http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-message.r?m=rmlLNJK
Otherwise the trail could have ended here:

http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-message.r?m=rmlXSDC

It was easy to find Gabriele's eval script through the topic index 
at Rebol.org. It's at http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/ml-display-message.r?m=rmlXWHS

interesting. wonder if it could be made into handling symbolic math...

Gabriele - as for multimethods, aren't we getting custom datatypes 
with rebol3? I thought Carl said that language will be "extensible", 
whatever extensible means though :-)

Priorities would mean more special cases for the evaluation - instead 
of a consistent op! behaviour.

It's not just + * - /, it's for // ** and or xor = > >= <= <> == 
=? too.

The left to right rule is itself quite an improvement in readability 
over the pure form:
>> * + 3 2 5
== 25

Please lets not make the mistake of using C precedence for basic 
ops. It will slow rebol.

and using parens work anyways.

Petr, about custom types, probably yes, but I don't think this has 
been decided yet; In case we have them, i think that at least TO 
needs to be implemented as a multimethod; then having multimethods 
in general might make sense... but I don't think this is going to 
be very high priority (there are more important things).

Gabriele, that was very interesting insight into the action dispatch. 
Hmmm... I guess the code-breaking aspect of swapping select's arguments 
as well as the fact that the interpreter would probably be slowed 
down sways me against the idea.

(I seem to remember this very discussion some long time ago...)

Carl... your speeding in your Blog REBOL 3.0 ...Give us time to think 
through your idea's ;-)

Rebolinth - the speed of blog is ok, what I wonder though is, how 
fast rebol 3 development can go, if there is so many ideas floating 
around :-)

Any information about how L10N & I18N will be implemented in REBOL 
3. Thanks.

I18N is partially discussed in the Unicode group, I'm not sure it 
has come up on the blog other than it being a goal, as with L10N...

I don't think there is a group here specifically geared toward localization, 
though I know it's a well discussed issue...

From the Roadmap: "Greater Locality Support 

It's time for REBOL to do a better job at supporting native languages 
and character-sets. Our goal to expand support with locality and 
unicode enhancements. In addition, it is a goal to release 3.0 with 
French, Italian, and perhaps one/two other languages as part of the 
standard distribution."

Yes I thought that that was a strange move... French and Italian..I 
can understand Localisation towards French and Spanish though.. and 
perhpas Asian or Arabic..but what is so special about Italian? (Many 
rebol projects in Italy perhaps?)

Gabriele   ;-)

the fact that i can do the translation :P

i.e. it can be in earlier. others will need community support.

Gabriele - what way in will locale support be done? Will there be 
support for more things, like locale setting for floating point - 
dot or comma, money representation char, etc. ?

Pekr: this is already solved in current REBOL I think - you can use 
both comma and dot for ffloating point and you can put anything before 
the money sign so you can have Kc$24,50 and so on.

ok, but no centralised container to keep locale related values in 
one logical group ...

My current job is localisation engineer working on some big software 
and I must say that current localisation/internalisation state is 
total mess. How do I miss good old Amiga catalogs! Such a simple 
idea and still not adapted on Windows. We do patch dlls directly...terrible. 
So I hope R3 will bring something like Amiga Localisation System.

hopefully so .... and you can probably send it to feedback, Carl 
told us he is checking feedback for suggestions ...

the Amiga way is the rough plan.

Is anyone intersted in improving the library interface in R3? I have 
a lib dialect (just posted to REBOL.org), and some notes I'll post 
here. Is it worth some time to put suggestions together for RT, or 
is everyone OK with the existing system?