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

[REBOL] Re: Can I define an anti function?

From: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 24-Feb-2004 15:55

Hi Romano,
>Ok, Lad > >this is my solution, (without refinements handling and without get and lit >arguments and without optimizations) >
I have got a few notes: 1) I am still not convinced, that a "get argument", (alias "fetched argument") is a good argument passing method. The disadvantage of it is, that you cannot easily supply a result of an expression as an argument. Example: anti func [x [logic!]] [x] ; this is hard to write correctly using the above method No native or mezzanine Core function uses this argument-passing method (although there are natives in Rebol/Core that can take functions as arguments). Allow me to poll other users: how many of you use this argument passing method? anti: func [:f ] [...] 2) Otherwise your solution is very close. The only bug is probably this:
>> f: func [get] [true] >> anti-f: anti f >> anti-f false
** Script Error: Cannot use path on logic! value ** Where: anti-f ** Near: native func [get][true] get/any 'get -L