[REBOL] Increment/Decrement Functions

Group, Just posted to http://www.rebol.org/utility/simple-math.r a little library that has some nifty increment (++) and decrement (--) functions to use. To give an idea what they do, below is a run through the values they work on. Only using ++ in the examples. The -- function works

[REBOL] timewarp bug? or Y2k bug? at rebol.org -Rebol survives the y12k r ollover? Re:

Hrrm, the date is alright in the script on my system, wonder what's causing it to change when it's uploaded. That's pretty currious. Cheerfulness, -ATE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Mr. "Timewarp" submitted some

[REBOL] Searching Functions by the Datatypes They Use

Hi folks, Posted to rebol.org in utilities a little function that lets you search through defined functions. You can tell it to find all functions using any of a series of datatypes with its default argument, using the /include refinement tell it to find the functions that use all the dat

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(9)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Have a nice day/night/evening/morning! > > Considering the 'random/seed help' thread: Is this a path? ;-) > > If so the order confuses me a little... > > It's function refinements... ^_^ And morning! is a new datatype?

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(5)

... so you only need word: :word if you want to go back to the index of the beginning of the sought after characters. Parse automagically moves the index just beyond the set of characters in the parse statement ... Hrrrmm Cheerfulness,

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(5)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I didn't follow the conversation but: > Why traverse the string again? You already traversed it by "--- ".. then you can > leave out the mark: :mark clause.. also you should use [thru newline] to prevent > another 'dumb' loop of the parser... > > rule: [ > "==="

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(3)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > EAT, I think this is what you need: > > headrule: [ > some [ > thru "=== " copy head to newline ( > append head " (FIRST LEVEL)" append full-contents head > ) > | >

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(2)

Andrew, By the time I posted that, my various combinations involved in trying to make it work were getting a bit convoluted. It's called "desperation". I want to understand how this works BADLY. It's been gnawing away at me to sit down and figure it out one of these days... So, with docs

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(5)

Near as I can tell, this rule matches the principle shown in Carl's stuff below: headrule: [ some [newline | "===" [[copy header to newline] ( append header " (FIRST LEVEL)" append full-contents header)] | "---" [[copy header to newline]

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(5)

Petr, Thanks, actually dug that post up already and been trying to decypher it... My closest approximations still aren't working. Perhaps someone will be kind enough to do a full step by step breakdown of the stuff below? Feel like I understand it pretty well, it's just not working w

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(4)

> Aha, so I am sorry as I am not too skilled in grammar creation. The problem > seems to be with "find this value OR that value", as string will be parsed > thru first occurance of "===", and if "---" occured first, it will not be > reflected. That would require some "parralel" searching for pars

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work? Re:(2)

Okay, granted. Here's the same rule with a different word... headrule: [some [thru "=== " copy header to newline ( append header " (FIRST LEVEL)" append full-contents header)| thru "--- " copy header to newline ( append h

[REBOL] Parse Question: Why Doesn't This Work?

Okay, question is simple: Here's my rule: headrule: [some [ [thru "=== " copy head to newline ( append head " (FIRST LEVEL)" append full-contents head) ] | some [thru "--- " copy head to newline ( append head "