Hi Gabriele,
> This is the only case I would use APPLY for --- passing arguments
> and refinements from another function. If the block you pass APPLY
> is not constructed programmatically, then you don't need APPLY at
> all. But if it is, having everything in the same order as in the
> function spec is much simpler.
The only case of which i am speaking is the case you show: a function which
call another function with the same context/refinements (a patch).
Instead, if i have a function like this:
my-func: [a b /skip value /reverse]
and i want to pass /reverse to find, I must construct exactly that kind of
block full of false which seems so strange to you and that you say you will
never use.
> But if it is, having everything in the same order as in the
> function spec is much simpler.
It is a solution, i do not negate it. Only, i do not like it.
> RPT> But i think that it is not enough to change an aspect of rebol
language: order
> RPT> of refinements must remain not important under any respect.
>
> I don't see why having such an APPLY would change this...
If i rewrite a function i must respect the refinements order to make old
program not fail.
---
Ciao
Romano
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
