Hi All ~
Below is a code snippet that has me stumped:
When I click the toggle, everything works fine.
However, pressing the hot key CTRL-s generates the error below -
shouldn't the hot key do exactly what a left click does?
Thansk for any help,
Kai
snip
toggle_start: t
> Actually, I'd consider this a REBOL problem. It's supposed to be a
> cross-platform language afer all, and numbers should not come out
> different on different systems.
I'll second that and point to file! as a good example of how platform
differences are / should be handled.
Regards,
On 25-Feb-04, Tom Conlin wrote:
> the belated but unhelpful answer you have likley heard by now is:
> 'dont use windows'
> since this is strictly an artifact of MS
Actually, I'd consider this a REBOL problem. It's supposed to be a
cross-platform language afer all, and numbers should not come
JFYI: Now there's REBOL syntax highlighting for Kate, a programmer's editor
for KDE/Linux. Still under development, suggestions - as always - welcome.
Here it is:
http://www.errru.net/rebol/utilities/katesyntax/readme.txt
http://www.errru.net/rebol/utilities/katesyntax/rebol.xml.txt
--
R.
--
T
how bout ...
antif: func [fn-args[block!]][not do fn-args]
then
anitif [fn args1 argn]
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Ladislav Mecir wrote:
>
> Doc draw my attention to the %subject%, which was discussed at
> comp.lang.scheme. The thread started with:
>
> {Suppose f is a function returning a boolean
the belated but unhelpful answer you have likley heard by now is:
'dont use windows'
since this is strictly an artifact of MS
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Hallvard Ystad wrote:
>
> Hi list,
>
> This is from a console session:
> >> third 0:00:01.09
> == 1.09
> >> third 0:00:0.09
> == 9E-2
>
> How can
So I was working on doing a few little xml-
parse additions, enhancements, etc.
and I was starting on a documentElement
function:
documentElement: func[blockdom]
[currentNode: make
Object![tagname: pick blockdom 1
attributes: either block? pick blockdom 2
[length? pick blockdom 2][0]
]]
> ..., but it wouldn't work for some cases. Have a look at
> http://www.compkarori.com/vanilla/display/subfunc.r , which does
> (essentially) the same thing ;-) and is optimized for speed by Romano (I
> recently found that some improvements can still be made - 67% speed-up
> and a correction
Ladislav Wrote:
> >you could use my encompass function to create an anti function.
> >
> >
> ..., but it wouldn't work for some cases. Have a look at
> http://www.compkarori.com/vanilla/display/subfunc.r , which does
> (essentially) the same thing ;-) and is optimized for speed
> by Romano (
> anti: func [f [any-function!] /local exec] [
> exec: func [block] reduce ['not 'apply 'first reduce [:f] 'block]
> func load mold third :f reduce [:exec first :f]
> ]
>
that's basically what encompass does including all refinements and their values.
you can even augment the argument l
Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch napsal(a):
>you could use my encompass function to create an anti function.
>
>
..., but it wouldn't work for some cases. Have a look at
http://www.compkarori.com/vanilla/display/subfunc.r , which does
(essentially) the same thing ;-) and is optimized for speed by Romano
Hi Romano,
>...but i agree, the :arg notation is never used and it requires a reference to a
>value instead of the "value itself", so it is not totally "correct" to be used
>it in context like this.
>
>About Scheme people, if they would speak "in general", they could be right: we
>cannot create a
you could use my encompass function to create an anti function.
It would even handle all the refinements transparently and would map all parameters,
without you needing to know the function's actual argument block.
-MAx
---
"You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution, but in
Hi Lad,
> I have got a few notes:
>
> 1) I am still not convinced, that a "get argument", (alias "fetched
> argument") is a good argument passing method. The disadvantage of it is,
> that you cannot easily supply a result of an expression as an argument.
yes, but it is so elegant to write
a
Hi Anton,
On Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 3:34:36 PM, you wrote:
AR> func [a b][native func [a b][a = b] get/any 'a get/any 'b]
AR> This 'native function is undocumented and it's not obvious
AR> to me what it does.
What you see is not what you get. ;-) What MOLD prints as "native"
above is not
Hi Anton,
That is the serialization of a native function referenced directly. In this
case happens to be the 'not function.
As you can understand, native functions cannot be serialized, and mold put a
'native word for every native it should serialize.
It also outputs 'op for every op! and 'acti
Anton Rolls napsal(a):
>The function it produces is interesting.
>
>
>
>>>f: func [a b][a = b]
>>>g: anti f
>>>probe :g
>>>
>>>
>func [a b][native func [a b][a = b] get/any 'a get/any 'b]
>
>This 'native function is undocumented and it's not obvious
>to me what it does.
>
>Anton.
>
>
t
Anton Rolls napsal(a):
>What is the purpose and utility of such a function ?
>
>Anton.
>
>
>
>>{Suppose f is a function returning a boolean.Is there a way of defining
>>a function anti, which, when given f, returns "not f"?
>>
This is a higher-order function. This style of programming is know
Hi Romano,
>Ok, Lad
>
>this is my solution, (without refinements handling and without get and lit
>arguments and without optimizations)
>
>
>
I have got a few notes:
1) I am still not convinced, that a "get argument", (alias "fetched
argument") is a good argument passing method. The disadvant
The function it produces is interesting.
>> f: func [a b][a = b]
>> g: anti f
>> probe :g
func [a b][native func [a b][a = b] get/any 'a get/any 'b]
This 'native function is undocumented and it's not obvious
to me what it does.
Anton.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mai
What is the purpose and utility of such a function ?
Anton.
> {Suppose f is a function returning a boolean.Is there a way of defining
> a function anti, which, when given f, returns "not f"?}
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the sub
Ok, Lad
this is my solution, (without refinements handling and without get and lit
arguments and without optimizations)
Do not read if you want to try by yourself.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
anti: func [[catch] :f /local body][
body: copy []
parse first :f [
some [
[end | refin
Hello,
Magic! has been updated.
You can download the new version of this web application framework from
http://rwst.no-ip.com/magic20/magic20.tar.gz
Documentation available at http://rwst.no-ip.com/magic20/ (in french)
Best regards
Olivier ;-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send a
Monday, February 23, 2004, 8:55:15 PM, Ladislav wrote:
> Question: Is the guess about Rebol correct? (I will post my answer
> later)
I'll second Gabriele's answer: The reasoning seems to be intriguing at
first glance, but it's (at least partly) wrong.
A (naive) demonstration:
anti: func [ f
Hi Ladislav,
On Monday, February 23, 2004, 8:55:15 PM, you wrote:
LM> Question: Is the guess about Rebol correct? (I will post my answer later)
At first glance it could seem correct, but it's clearly wrong.
Regards,
Gabriele.
--
Gabriele Santilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- REBOL Programmer
A
Hi Paul,
On Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 2:34:24 AM, you wrote:
PT> What is the false for in the awake function?
If AWAKE returns true, WAIT will return. Otherwise, WAIT continues
waiting. For example, when all View windows are closed, the event
port's awake function returns true, so that DO-EV
Hi Ladislav,
On Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 2:32:36 AM, you wrote:
LM> It isn't, because it takes 2 arguments, while ANTI has to take just one: F
... and return a function.
Regards,
Gabriele.
--
Gabriele Santilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- REBOL Programmer
Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila -
Dixit Carl Read (09.23 24.02.2004):
>This discussion has got me experimenting a bit. Look at this, for
>instance...
>
>>> dec: 0.1
>== 1E-5
>>> time: 1:01
>== 1:01
>>> time/second: dec
>== 1E-5
>>> time
>== 1:01:00.1
Well, but when you try to access only the seconds here (after doing the
On 24-Feb-04, Graham Chiu wrote:
> Hallvard Ystad wrote.. apparently on 23-Feb-2004/21:00:15+1:00
>> Hi list,
>> This is from a console session:
third 0:00:01.09
>> == 1.09
third 0:00:0.09
>> == 9E-2
>> How can I have the second example printed without scientific
>> notation (as secon
29 matches
Mail list logo
