[REBOL] Re: Context - code included- 2nd version
From: holger:rebol at: 13-Sep-2001 17:40
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 02:07:22AM +0200, Ladislav Mecir wrote:
> 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?
Technically, the relation is only from the word to the value, not the other
way around. No reference is possible from a value to a word that evaluates to
> So, are you telling that I should change the definition of the context
> notion to reflect that it should be a name-value mapping?
Yes, as others have advised you. The values bound words evaluate to
are kept in contexts, not in words.