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

[REBOL] Re: Clunky-looking code

From: jelinem1:nationwide at: 2-Apr-2001 12:51

To write the most compact piece of code for performing this task one could split some hairs and chop out a few chars here and there, but that does not necessarily make it more readable/maintainable or better. Despite the fact that this email will get like a zillion replies, here's my 2c. If you want to multiply two blocks, once, and have no need to get into this sort of thing any more deeply, put your inelegant code in a function (where it can elegantly be called) and get on with it. It you wish to use the concept over again, and even expound on it, write a dialect. The dialecting is the part that REBOL will excel at over other languages. - Michael Jelinek [Sanghabum--aol--com] on 04/02/2001 12:25:11 PM From: [Sanghabum--aol--com] on 04/02/2001 12:25 PM Please respond to [rebol-list--rebol--com] Sent by: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] To: [rebol-list--rebol--com] cc: Subject: [REBOL] Clunky-looking code I'm trying to multiply respective elements of two blocks and get a single sum: e.g. [a b c] * [d e f] = a*d + b*e + c*f I have no problem writing the code .... There are two versions of the function listed below. But it looks irredeemably inelegant compared to almost any other language I know .... I would not like to have to do matrix operations in Rebol! Am I missing some elegant way of running up two blocks in step? ;; ----- Method 1 MultiplyBlocks1: func [Block1 Block2 /local Sum ind] [ sum: 0 for ind 1 Length? Block1 1 [ sum: sum + ((pick Block1 ind) * (pick Block2 ind)) ] ; for return sum ] ; func ;; ----- Method 2 MultiplyBlocks2: func [Block1 Block2 /local Sum] [ sum: 0 Loop (Length? Block1) [ sum: sum + ((first Block1) * (first Block2)) block1: Next Block1 block2: Next Block2 ] ; loop Return Sum ] ; func ;; ----- Example of execution print MultiplyBlocks1 [1 5 10 25] [0 5 6 20] print MultiplyBlocks2 [1 5 10 25] [0 5 6 20] Thanks, Colin.