Hi Allessandro Yes, there are at least 2 caveats to the approach of converting the string to a block of REBOL words with >> string: "This is a string with some words" == "This is a string with some words" >> b: to-block "This is a string with some words" == [This is a string with some words] >> type? first b == word! The first caveat is that not everything we may want as "words" is a valid REBOL word. >> to-block "This is a string |\funny" ** Syntax Error: Invalid word -- |\funny. ** Where: (line 1) This is a string |\funny So the conversion fails. The second caveat is that the REBOL dictionary only holds 2558 words. >> repeat j 3000 [append b to-word join 'word j] ** Internal Error: No more global variable space. ** Where: to word! :value >> length? first rebol/words == 2558 CAUTION: There is no way to remove words from the dictionary, the GC does not touch them. In order to create a new word after this experiment, you will have to start a new REBOL session. So if there are many unique "words" in the string, you will permanently tie up space in the REBOL dictionary. Galt's solution: string: "This is a string with some words" blk: parse/all string " " print first back find blk "with" is much better, because it converts the string to a block of string! values rather than a block of REBOL words. If you want to just parse on any whitespace (including linefeed, etc), you can use >> parse string none == ["This" "is" "a" "string" "with" "some" "words"] which in this case gives the same result as parse/all string " " -Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 3:00 PM Subject: [REBOL] Re: Finding the previous value in a string Re: > >- Open Your Mind -< > > > > Quoting from [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message (11-Aug-00 22:47:59). > > s> ; How about this: > s> > s> string: "This is a string with some words" > s> select head reverse to-block string 'with > > ... or maybe ... > first back find to-block string 'with > > s> ; Or... > s> > s> to-string select head reverse to-block string 'with > s> > s> ; ... if you need it converted back into a string. > > ... or maybe ... > to-string first back find to-block string 'with > > > There is some caveat with my approach, but I'm falling down due to severe lack of sleep and I can't remember it, so goodnight. :-) > > > > > Alessandro Pini ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > "Have you been getting enough sleep?" "More or less. Mostly less." (E.M.H.P. & Janeway) >
