[REBOL] Re: Context - code included- 2nd version
From: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 14-Sep-2001 2:07
Hi,
----- Original Message -----
From: Holger Kruse <[holger--rebol--com]>
To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]>
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 11:33 PM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: Context - code included- 2nd version
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 10:29:49PM +0200, Ladislav Mecir wrote:
>
> > Would you like to change it to: "...words represent values...", "values
are
> > represented by words..." [RCUG 2.3 p. 3-13], or something different?
>
> Neither, actually, because both wordings imply a static reference, which
does
> not exist.
Then, what easily reversible (by "reversible" is meant that it can describe
a relation between a word and a value and, vice versa, its reversed version
can describe a relation between a value and a word) wording using less than
eight words not implying a static reference is available?
> Plus, in this specific instance, your definition is not just redundant,
but
> actually conflicting, because a context is, by definition, a name-value
> mapping
So, are you telling that I should change the definition of the context
notion to reflect that it should be a name-value mapping?
> > > The facts are: words live inside of blocks.
> >
> > I would add: not always. In Rebol it is possible to create words that
don't
> > "live inside of blocks".
>
> If you want to be really precise then replace "block" with "block series":
> every single word in REBOL, without exception, exists inside of a block
series.
> Always.
I am not sure I understand the meaning of that.
Cheers
Ladislav
