[REBOL] Re: Why does 'reverse returns the tail of the block?
From: brett:codeconscious at: 12-Nov-2002 17:41
> I suspect that 'reverse returns the 'tail of the block, because to return
> the 'head of the block could be wrong, if one is 'reverse-ing only part of
a
> block? For example:
Probably a little more accurate to say that reverse returns the tail of the
changed sequence. Having reverse return a modified series reference probably
gives a little more info than just returning the original series reference,
especially when you include the /PART refinement:
>> s2: reverse/part at s1: [1 2 3 4 5] 2 3
== [5]
>> s1
== [1 4 3 2 5]
>> s2
== [5]
> Though I'm not sure why one would want to only reverse part of a block (or
> series)?
Insert, Change, Remove, Find, Copy, Uppercase all have a part sequence
effect - seems reasonable for REVERSE to have one too :^)
Regards,
Brett.
