AltME groups: search

Similarity between the two is not so easily related, as Red is more 
dynamic than Red/System.

so I guess a similar operation is needed for fonts (I have no concrete 
bg in fonts, only view a similarity)

Hello, I would like to announce the availability of  Simetrics on 
rebol.org. This library implements a few effective and widely used 
metrics for measuring string similarity and for searching documents 
amongst a large collection of documents. A extensive documentation 
is also available on rebol.org and a discussion forum has been opened.

Louis, agree totally. Witness the confusion between Anton and myself 
in the View group about what a facet is (and throw into the mix View 
facets, VID facets and Style facets). I also don't like the close 
visual and phonetic similarity between face and facet ... it's just 
too easy to mistype / misread (with a single "t" to distinguish the 
two). Another term to consider:

	Feel, behaviour, action or event handler?


The very first section of the document will be a concepts / terminology 
section which will have a simple table that maps View terms / concepts 
to their RebGUI equivilents. Thereafter the RebGUI terms will be 
*consistently* used.

Hum, Logo like Rebol... yes, maybe. I see the similarity. But why 
is Logo so much easier to learn? I will think about that.

The problem with relaxing the lexical rules of the LOAD function 
is that REBOL can't handle natural language syntax, particularly 
punctuation. You would need to convert a word to a string to tell 
the similarity between "Hello" and "Hello,", at which point you are 
doing string parsing again, but slower.

there is actually a built-in similarity to counter:

to-time 78
== 0:01:18

Just imagine any base instead of just !24.60.60

It looks like an algorithm similar to EQUAL-STATE? will work for 
structural equivalence if you get rid of lines 518 and 519. Some 
of the comparisons should be relaxed to the same level as the comparison 
function you are implementing too. I notice that it does topological 
similarity rather than strict structural equivalence :)

RobertS, you said that similarity with TCL is a red flag, but that 
is not the case. TCL, like Ruby, is known to be bad because of its 
internals and semantics, not its syntax. XML and Perl are the ones 
with bad syntax.

Isn't this just a special case of printf ..  so why not implement 
printf instead? - it does not have anything in common with printf, 
except for the superficial similarity

thanks for explanations to both of you. so it's more of a backend 
similarity