Re: [Factor-talk] subseq?
That's a fair point since we have larger sets of breaking changes planned. And better refactor tools planned that might allow an 0.98-to-0.99 upgrade path Okay, I agree and will revert in a few. Sorry for the churn. Thanks, John. > On Jan 21, 2017, at 3:44 AM, Jon Harper wrote: > > Hi, > How close is the next release ? I saw Slava's taunt on github > https://github.com/factor/factor/issues/1783 :) > > Maybe revert it for 0.98 and go with this for 0.99 ? Code will break silently > on this since the number of arguments is the same. > > > Jon > >> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:27 PM, CW Alston wrote: >> Thanks for the heads-up, John - >> >> I would agree that your changes are a more natural locution. I use these >> words a lot >> in various vocabs, but I reckon it won't be too hard to adapt to this new >> pattern. >> >> Cheers, >> ~cw >> >>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:55 PM, John Benediktsson >>> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of >>> Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. >>> >>> Instead of: >>> >>> ( subseq seq -- ? ) >>> >>> it is now: >>> >>> ( seq subseq -- ? ) >>> >>> It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of >>> ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a >>> relatively common word. >>> >>> Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> John. >>> >>> -- >>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >>> ___ >>> Factor-talk mailing list >>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ~ Memento Amori >> >> -- >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >> ___ >> Factor-talk mailing list >> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk >> > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] subseq?
I found only one place in my code where I have used `subseq?`, and even there it was `swap subseq?`. 21.01.2017, 14:45, "Jon Harper" :Hi,How close is the next release ? I saw Slava's taunt on github https://github.com/factor/factor/issues/1783 :)Maybe revert it for 0.98 and go with this for 0.99 ? Code will break silently on this since the number of arguments is the same. Jon On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:27 PM, CW Alstonwrote:Thanks for the heads-up, John - I would agree that your changes are a more natural locution. I use these words a lotin various vocabs, but I reckon it won't be too hard to adapt to this new pattern. Cheers, ~cw On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:55 PM, John Benediktsson wrote:Hi, I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. Instead of: ( subseq seq -- ? ) it is now: ( seq subseq -- ? ) It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a relatively common word. Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. Thanks,John.--Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's mostengaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___Factor-talk mailing listFactor-talk@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- ~ Memento Amori --Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's mostengaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___Factor-talk mailing listFactor-talk@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk ,--Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's mostengaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot,___Factor-talk mailing listFactor-talk@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk ---=---Александр -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] subseq?
Hi, How close is the next release ? I saw Slava's taunt on github https://github.com/factor/factor/issues/1783 :) Maybe revert it for 0.98 and go with this for 0.99 ? Code will break silently on this since the number of arguments is the same. Jon On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 12:27 PM, CW Alston wrote: > Thanks for the heads-up, John - > > I would agree that your changes are a more natural locution. I use these > words a lot > in various vocabs, but I reckon it won't be too hard to adapt to this new > pattern. > > Cheers, > ~cw > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:55 PM, John Benediktsson > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of >> Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. >> >> Instead of: >> >> ( subseq seq -- ? ) >> >> it is now: >> >> ( seq subseq -- ? ) >> >> It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of >> ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a >> relatively common word. >> >> Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. >> >> Thanks, >> John. >> >> >> -- >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >> ___ >> Factor-talk mailing list >> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk >> >> > > > -- > *~ Memento Amori* > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > > -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] subseq?
I like it. I find that most words are more natural when their stack effects are ( larger-part smaller-part -- ... ) and the "seq" is of course larger than the "subseq". 2017-01-21 7:55 GMT+01:00 John Benediktsson : > Hi, > > I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of > Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. > > Instead of: > > ( subseq seq -- ? ) > > it is now: > > ( seq subseq -- ? ) > > It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of > ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a > relatively common word. > > Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. > > Thanks, > John. > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > -- mvh/best regards Björn Lindqvist -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] subseq?
Thanks for the heads-up, John - I would agree that your changes are a more natural locution. I use these words a lot in various vocabs, but I reckon it won't be too hard to adapt to this new pattern. Cheers, ~cw On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:55 PM, John Benediktsson wrote: > Hi, > > I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of > Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. > > Instead of: > > ( subseq seq -- ? ) > > it is now: > > ( seq subseq -- ? ) > > It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of > ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a > relatively common word. > > Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. > > Thanks, > John. > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > Factor-talk mailing list > Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > > -- *~ Memento Amori* -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
[Factor-talk] subseq?
Hi, I pushed a (breaking compatibility) change to the development branch of Factor that swaps the arguments for ``start``, ``start*``, and ``subseq?``. Instead of: ( subseq seq -- ? ) it is now: ( seq subseq -- ? ) It is more natural this way, and most places it was used did some form of ``swap subseq?``, but it does create a backwards compatibility problem in a relatively common word. Please let me know if this is a problem for anyone. Thanks, John. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk