Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: Bug! in assignment to date! values with stacked set-path values

From: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 14-Nov-2002 16:31

Hi Romano,
> What i do not understand is what you means with "make > #"(" a forbidden char in words".
It means, that [(a)] should contain a paren! containing a word as it did, but (a)/(b) shall differ from (a) / (b), i.e. parens shall be treated specifically - neither as possible word characters, nor as ordinary delimiters. Currently we have: length? [(a)/(b)] ; == 3 , while I am proposing, that we should get: length? [(a)/(b)] ; == 1 and type? first [(a)/(b)] ; == path! OTOH, it is OK to obtain: length? [(a) / (b)] ; == 3 What do you think? One may try to check an analogical situation: [a]/[b] versus [a] / [b]. What would be the best solution in that case?
> Are you asking something as: > > to-word "(" ;== error! > > And if this is the case, why?
This case doesn't matter, any solution is acceptable to me.
> I'm also asking myself if this notation: > > a/(1 + 1) ;== a/2 > > is compatible with the less agressive evaluation of new betas. What do you > think?
I would suggest even less aggressive evaluation: if a word is evaluated, like e.g. a , the result should be the same as the result of :a with *exactly* one exception: if A is a function, then the function should be evaluated in the former case. I am sure, that this kind of word evaluation isn't incompatible with the suggested path evaluation change. Ciao -L