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

[REBOL] Re: REBOL Enhancement Proposals (REPs)

From: ryanc:iesco-dms at: 25-Sep-2001 16:57

The parens in paths idea has come up before and I really liked it then. Although now I see it as asking alot, and maybe too much from the REBOL interpeter. I also now think it tends to break some simplicity of REBOL. The problem is that it introduces a really strange animal into REBOL, a sort of seriesword. If you look at all things in REBOL they breakup nicely into series or words. This seriesword would not because it would simultaniusly represent a series, a non series value, and a word itself. Somethings in REBOL appear as though they might do this, like urls, but actually they remain to the interpeter as mere words, and are broken up into a series by its scheme under certain circumstances. 'Select makes quick work of such situations well enough, without strange animals. I do like auto binding set idea though. --Ryan Geza Lakner MD wrote:
> Hello REBOLers, > > Why wouldn't we collect - following the path of Python Enhancement > Proposals i.e. PEPs - REBOL Enhancement Proposals (REPs) ? > > Some of us certainly sent ideas to RT's feedback but why couldn't we > share and discuss these information before transmitting it to RT's "magic > cauldron" ? > > Let me start the row with my 2 (really two :-) ) cents : > > REBOL Enhancement Proposals > > > #1 Immediate (paren) values in paths > > It would be a very nice and elegant construct > if paths may contain immediately evaluated paren expressions yielding > path fragments, not only words: > > e.g. > a: [1 2 3] > > and instead of: > b: 2 > probe a/:b > > this: > probe a/(1 + 1) > > or with a twist: > probe a/(b) > > I think that this modification is not simply a syntactic sugar but eliminates > setting intermediate working words and using them only once - > i.e. in the creation of a dynamic path value. > > #2 "Polymorph" multiple 'SET > > SET now expects a word to set. Words in objects seem to be buried deep, > being not really suitable for an elegant multiple set operation: > > e.g. > a: context [ b: context [c: none]] > d: context [ e: none] > > The logical and straightforward way unfortunately does not work: > set [a/b/c d/e] [1 2] > > The current method to bind a word in an object to a value is IMHO awkward and > distorts code readability thus expressiveness: > set reduce [(in a/b 'c) (in d 'e)] [1 2] > > -- > Best regards, > Geza Lakner MD mailto:[geza67--freestart--hu] > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > [rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes.
-- Ryan Cole Programmer Analyst 707-468-5400