On 05-Apr-00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2000, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Request for Comments on Split-Path Revision
> >However, you would normally think that a split path type of function would
> >separate the directory path from the file name itself. This would take
> %a/b
Hello,
> What you _could_ do, is something like
>
> #!rebol -cs
> REBOL[]
> secure [net quit]
>
> This would give all access to files, but none to the web.
Why would one do that? Can it still process a form? How does this exactly
limit Rebol?
Regards,
Rachid
Hi everybody!
Could you please help me?
I want to download REBOL/view.
(for AmigaOS or Win).
What could I do?
Maxim.
I suspect that you won't be able to use 'parse - or at least as simplified
as the example you gave.
I have a gripe with 'parse also, which I would REALLY like to see changed in
an upcoming release.
When I use the '| operator (for OR), 'parse will search the entire string
for the first pattern th
Peter,
I assume you do not have access to a UNIX? If you did, the first thing I
would do is to run a "strings" on the database file. That may give you more
than the limited 'charset below, but it would be trivially easy.
- Michael Jelinek
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mail
Without denigrating any potential REBOL-based solutions, this problem could be
solved with the free Icon language pretty trivially.
There is a library function in Icon called "deletec(s,c)" which deletes all
characters in string s that belong to charset c. In Icon both strings and
charsets are
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 6:46 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Salvaging ASCII data from binary file
> Hi,
>
> I have been given a messed up (beyond hope) database file of 5MB and would
> like to remove all the extended and
Hi bciceron,
The short version is: I believe it's a bug.
The long version:
space at the begining of string:
>> parse " LIB1" ["LIB1"]
== true
space smack in the middle of token:
>> parse "LI B1" ["LIB1"]
== false
Now, that somehow makes sense. If I am parsing for the token LIB1 I do not
wa
Hi,
I have been given a messed up (beyond hope) database file of 5MB and would
like to remove all the extended and unprintable characters, then save the
result as a text file. The following displays the characters:
good-chars: charset [#" " - #"/" #"0" - #"9" #"A" - #"Z" #"a" - #"z"]
file: to-
Hi Olivier,
I'm not a CGI person, really so I can't be of much help here,
I have a user.r file supplied.
My first problems were due to a wrong path, and I found about
my home-dir somewhere in the unofficial faq.
The only things I could add, have you tried the script locally?
Have you ftp'd as
Hello.
I think I found bug in positive?
for numbers it works like a champ:
>> positive? -1
== false
>> positive? 0
== false
>> positive? 1
== true
but for time it has a bug imho:
>> positive? -1:00
== false
>> positive? 0:00
== true
>> positive? 1:00
== true
I think that posit
thx , good point.
but i cannot change the input string to parse.
so if it is a bug can we get a fix, and
how to workaround it ?
it's only a piece of a much longer and still growing dialect .
-- Apparently the 'some is matching the leading/trailing white space:
--
-- Thus, [some symbol] (using
Perfect timing. We're closely reviewing our user license right now and
are re-considering the transferability of REBOL for non-commercial uses. Thanks for
your feedback and suggestions!
best regards, Dan
At 01:34 PM 4/4/00 +0200, you wrote:
>Yes, these were exactly my concerns I once tried t
Apparently the 'some is matching the leading/trailing white space:
>> parse " LIB1 " [lib-type]
== false
>> parse " LIB1 " [some lib-type]
== true
Curiously though, try this:
>> parse "asergd asergd" [some symbol some symbol]
== false
>> parse "asergd asergd" [some symbol]
== true
Thus, [some
Hi Gisle,
you wrote:
>Elan's idea of being able to optionally specify return types of a
>function would be nice
Thank you. I think this email contains a rather complete return type
enforcer function (further below).
>provided that all natives that can
>return more than one type used it.
This
On Wed, Apr 5, 2000, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Request for Comments on Split-Path Revision
>---
>
>Issue: Should split-path be changed?
>
>Discussion:
>
>Split-path currently returns the last element of a path, regardless of
whether
>it is a file or dire
parse is very powerfull but still kills me with spacer:
>> parse "asergd" lib-name
== true
>> parse "LIB1" lib-type
== true
so the 2 elements matches the 2 single rules.
but pout together they don't :
>> parse "asergd LIB1" [lib-name lib-type]
== false
>> probe parse "asergd LIB1" [lib-name
Request for Comments on Split-Path Revision
---
Issue: Should split-path be changed?
Discussion:
Split-path currently returns the last element of a path, regardless of whether it is a
file or directory. That is:
>> split-path %a/b/c
== [%a/b/ %c]
>> s
Yes, these were exactly my concerns I once tried to express
to Carl, but I didn't succeed well.
I think the license for the free versions of Rebol should
definitely show this freedom.
regards,
Ingo
Those were the words of [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> If I write a client-side application using REBOL/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 7:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [REBOL] [REBOL]Evaluating characters in a string Re:
>instead of "same?" use "equal?" and use "#" in
>single character tests. This works:
>ms: 0
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How is dialecting different from defining a new word in
> Forth? How does this make REBOL better than any language
> which allows you to define new words?
You will appreciate the difference when REBOL/Core 2.3 will be
released.
You not only can redefine words, you ca
instead of "same?" use "equal?" and use "#" in
single character tests. This works:
ms: 0
str: "my+name+is+tim"
forall str
[
if equal? first str #"m"
[ms: ms + 1]
if equal? first str #"+"
[change str #" "]
]
print ["ms: " ms]
str: head str
print str
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/05 12:3
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well Gisle...
>
> REBOL is currently an interpreted language. This means that all of
> the various language processing, including type-checking, is done at
> runtime. Under these circumstances, type-checking is a luxury, only
> done to catch errors
23 matches
Mail list logo
