to-string! will convert 100 to a string, while make string! will construct
an empty string with allocation for at least 100 elements.
- jim
At 09:19 PM 12/8/99 -0600, you wrote:
Hello,
On 30-Nov-99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. y: make string! 100 creates a
At 11/29/99 02:12 PM -0800, you wrote:
Here are three more questions:
1. x/:i syntax can get but not set values in a block... why?
This path notation is a shorthand for getting values
in a series. Compared to the functional approach
(using pick and change) it is limited, but I believe
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" ]
== ["this" "is" "a" "test"]
i: 3
== 3
x/:i
== "a"
; but all attempts to set x/:i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. y: make string! 100 creates a string of length 0... why?
rebol dictionary entry implies 100 would be length or
value...
IMHO, it's a big fat bug. The same happens with blocks BTW. I just reported
both as a bug.
I think "make
Hi
I do not cease to object (in part:) to the REBOL creator.
Carl wrote:
"Note that using MAKE like this is really not necessary.
"REBOL strings automatically grow in size. That
"is, you can create a string of size 1, then add 99 chars to it
"w/o a problem. The MAKE is only used for
Ah, quite true, but...
I'm not very happy about READ-IO. It was a put there
during the rush to get 2.0 networking running. You may have
noticed that it was not documented for quite a while. That's
because the proper way to read from any socket is the same as
obtaining a copy of data for any
Hi Carl,
you wrote:
data: copy/1024 socket ;-- data up to 1024 units
Shouldn't that be copy/part socket 1024? Or is this an undocumented
shortcut I've overlooked so far?
TIA,
Elan
Whoops, you got it.
data: copy/part socket 1024
Mov'n too fast.
-Carl
At 11/30/99 02:56 PM -0800, you wrote:
Hi Carl,
you wrote:
data: copy/1024 socket ;-- data up to 1024 units
Shouldn't that be copy/part socket 1024? Or is this an undocumented
shortcut I've overlooked so
At 02:12 PM 11/29/99 -0800, you wrote:
Here are three more questions:
1. x/:i syntax can get but not set values in a block... why?
Because REBOL does not permit the notation :i:
Since i is a word, i: would be setting the i as a reference to some value,
at the same time :i is dereferencing
