[REBOL] Re: Parse rules as data
From: joel:neely:fedex at: 27-Jun-2001 10:24
Brett Handley wrote:
> The idea you think I had appears not to be the one I think
> I had. But you're most welcome to pursue the former, though
> my interest is actually in the latter.
You're welcome to credit for both! ;-) I was just observing
another application of the root notion of "reverse interpreting"
the parse dialect.
> Then I'd like to provide a new model and have content
> "calculated" for me doing something like:
> rebsite: transform author-index rebsites-spec hints-spec
> where rebsites-spec is
> rebsite-spec: context [
> reblink: ['folder linkurl 'info author]
> author: [string!]
> linkurl: [url!]
> model*: [ any reblink ]
> and hint-spec contains the magical transformation dialect
> that makes it all possible :)
> So I guess I'm wondering if some function 'transform and some
> fantastic transformation dialect will be more economical than
> just writing the transformation directly in straight Rebol code.
I'd guess it depends on how often one does transformations that
are sufficiently similar. There are probably situations where the
(possibly high) investment in effort to implement the transformer
would have a payback over repeatedly hand-crafting the individual
translations, but I'd need LOTS of experience doing the specific
cases before I'd feel comfortable doing the general case.
> Should I go back to dreaming?
Dreams are good! For some dream-inspiration, take a look at
the specs for XSL and XSLT at
They're addressing the corresponsing problem for XML -- given one
structure expressed in XML, how can one write rules that specifiy
how to map it to a different structure in XML/HTML/XHTML?
It might give you some more ideas.
It's turtles all the way down!