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

[REBOL] Re: Limitation coming from the "initialize" refinement used with the "Ar

From: gerardcote:sympatico:ca at: 28-Jun-2002 12:06

Hello Tom,
> for your second question an answer that will undoubtably be improved opon > is: > > >> set['n1 'n2 'total 'diff] compose[15 25 (does [n1 + n2]) (does [n2 - n1])] > == [15 25 func [][n1 + n2] func [][n2 - n1]]
Thanks again for this fresh view of another way of defining a short function - this is very concise and this is the solution that approaches the most my original way of doing things (on a syntax basis) even you defined 2 functions that must be evaluated each time they are used instead of getting 2 values directly. I only hope the execution time is not a way too long when compared to other approaches. This will surely be very useful to me in a near future ...
> > for the first part- > though there are far better solutions than the one I offered > I am not seeing a glitch. (REBOL/Core on w98) > > >> do rejoin['a "/" r "/" c ": " 10] > == [10 0] > >> print a/:r/:c
Tom, you were absolutely right - your answer is really a functional one. Sorry for my confusion about the way I interpreted your original suggestion. I was faulty and your version was really OK. I simply thought you were bad by writing ' tab_nbr (that is a lit-word) instead of my own string "tab_nbr/" and so I have been fooled when I substituted your original work for a modified one before really testing it. This is only after testing MY OWN modification that nothing more was operating. However I didn't realize that I was the author of the glitch I reported publicly as yours. Sorry about that. You did well to tell me back that you were right because this learned me 2 other things : a) Don't take for granted that my own view is the only way to go - even if I really demonstrate that everything is well-founded on my part (and fairly that was not the case here) ; b) Don't criticize too quickly other's work even if I think I am right - especially in a public exchange - something that in the present case I unfortunaltely did and I sincerely regret it but it's a little late now. Sorry again for my blunder and I publicly ask you to excuse me for this uncalled-for attitude, even if it was lead in part by some misconception from me. I'll remember the lesson and please continue to reply to my questions as you did before. I learned a lots since my last to questions - frankly more than I thought I would ... (I was once a victim of such a non voluntary discredit from an inexperienced student and this really put me in a severe situation in front of an entire class - I really don't know how I didn't catch this lesson better than I did. Hope this will not cause you any other prejudice to you since it is entirely my fault). Regards, Gerard