Hello Allen
On 18-Oct-00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> For a quick intro and some handy shell scripts, you can point them
> to Jeff's recent article at
> http://www.unixreview.com/development/articles/0009ds.shtml
>
>
> I see QNX are going to be at ACE2K http://www.ace2k.net . I'll
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 25-Sep-00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Jeff already signaled, that List! and Hash! datatypes are being
>> fixed. I
> succeeded to track down the behaviour to the following:
>>
>> h: make hash! 0
>> insert h copy "0123456789"
>> h
>> recycle
>> in
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I only wish I had more time to play around with REBOL :(.
On 29-Aug-00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The corrected version:
>
> ideal-looper: func [
>[throw]
>'element [word!]
>'index [word!]
>series [series!]
>code [block!]
>/local f i
> ] [
>f
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 21-Jun-00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> 1) what should "code that returns nothing" return?
>>
>> There is an approach that is even nowadays present in Rebol (only
>> residually, I admit). "Code that returns nothing" can return None.
>
> I
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 30-Nov-99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, this is true. It is an artifact of the very pure binding model
> used by REBOL. (What I call definitional binding, similar to, but
> not quite the same as, static binding.)
>
> We will eventually add a METHOD datatype to allow
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 30-Nov-99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I try just something very ugly and it works:
>
>>>1. x/:i syntax can get but not set values in a block... why?
>>>
>>> Script started on Mon Nov 29 14:07:07 1999
>>> l
> x: [ "this" "is" "a" "test" ]
>>>
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 13-Oct-99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> If you haven't found it yet, there is a spelling error of "myarray"
> in this code sample. I presume that will fix it.
>
No it won't :(
After a quick dabble, I came up with the following:
>> my-array: array/initial [3 3 3] 0
=
