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

[REBOL] Re: head reverse annoys me

From: hallvard::ystad::oops-as::no at: 19-Dec-2004 9:54

OK, folks, this is my third attempt at posting this email. Please excuse me if it appears thrice (I doubt that should happen, though). Hallvard Original message: It will not break, since head head "123" is identical to head "123" i.e. if 'reverse were to do 'head all by itself, performing an extra 'head on the series won't change anything. I haven't seen _any_ examples of 'reverse being used _without_ 'head (situations where scrips might actually break), as Carl pointed out in his post. Then there is the current inconsistency in 'reverse: tuples! and pairs! (since they are not series!) will not be "empty" after being reversed (see And then there are lists! : reverse to-list [1 2 3] == make list! [1] head reverse to-list [1 2 3] == make list! [3 2 1] index? reverse [1 2 3] ; block == 4 index? reverse to-list [1 2 3] ; list == 3 An odd difference, if you ask me. Maybe this could be done more logical too, if 'reverse's behaviour were to change? HY On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:29:04 EST [SunandaDH--aol--com] wrote: