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

[REBOL] pinging SELMA Re:

From: brian:hawley:bigfoot at: 19-Sep-2000 21:20

Jeff wrote:
> BTW: Anyone made any improvements to SELMA that they would > like to share? > > -jeff
Now that you mention it, here's a suggestion that I majܖn February 1 to fix SELMA. There is a long-standing bug in the parse native in all versions of REBOL that affects the code in SELMA that parses subject lines. I've reported this bug to Feedback a few times. The parse bug still stands in all current (and experimental) versions that I have tested. Here's the last message that I sent on the subject: ------------------------------------------------------------ I found a bug in parse that affects the Repost function in the Selma source. I'll tell you more about the bug after I can do a little more analysis. There was also a potentially crash-causing call to to-integer for some subject lines, and "[REBOL]" used instead of list-tag. This will fix the Repost function: Repost: func [message /local here there re-cnt] [ re-cnt: 0 parse message/subject [ some [ to "re:" here: 3 skip [ "(" copy num digits ")" ( if num [re-cnt: re-cnt + to-integer trim num] ) | none (re-cnt: 1 + re-cnt) ] any " " there: (remove/part here there) :here ] ] parse message/subject [ here: any list-tag any " " there: (remove/part here there) :here ] insert tail trim message/subject " Re:" if re-cnt > 1 [ insert tail message/subject reduce ["(" re-cnt ")"] ] post message ] While you're at it, the parse rule in Process-Mail, [thru "re:" list-tag] can be changed to [thru "re:"] . This should work for the [ALLY] list as well. ------------------------------------------------------------ ...And here's some code that demonstrates the parse bug, that I also sent to Feedback: -----------------------------------------------------------[ REBOL [ Title: "Parse bug demonstration" Author: "Brian Hawley" Email: [brian--hawley--bigfoot--com] Date: 3-Feb-2000 ] ; First, with optional one "a" y-cnt: 0 parse a: "y a a y z" [ some [ to "y" here: "y" 0 1 "a" ; Note only one "a" optional here any " " there: (y-cnt: 1 + :y-cnt remove/part :here :there) :here ] ; This block should run twice, and does ] print [mold a y-cnt {(should be "a z" 2)}] ; Second, with optional more than one "a" y-cnt: 0 parse a: "y a a y z" [ some [ to "y" here: "y" 0 2 "a" ; Note more than one "a" optional here any " " there: (y-cnt: 1 + :y-cnt remove/part :here :there) :here ] ; This block should run twice, but doesn't ] print [mold a y-cnt {(should be "z" 2)}] comment { This error shows up when you use any form to express wanting multiple "a", including [0 n "a"], [some "a"] and [any "a"]. I haven't found any dependency on which letters you are searching for or how many, at least in this example. You know, if I had the source to parse I could figure this out for you, hint, hint :). } ]----------------------------------------------------------- I hope that this helps. Brian Hawley