[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
www.iesco-dms.com
707-468-5400
