robert M. wrote
> Hi, I made several test WRT use blocks VS objects. To me it
> showed up that
> blocks are more flexible (it can be expanded) and neutral in
> that those
> molded blocks can be read by other applications without a big
> problem.
> Robert
Since you can use path not
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 23:30:11 -0700, Elan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My preference for this kind of tasks is using objects. Even though it is
> a little more verbose, I find it quite intuitive to use the get and set
> functions, as in:
> ...
Hi, I made several test WRT use blocks VS objects. To
> > db: [id1 [name "Joe" num 32]]
> >
> > to be read with
> >
> > db/id1/name
> > db/id1/num
>
> why is it that I missed this path ('select) notation for 4 years?
There's a discipline that needs to followed with REBOL. Once you think you
feel confident about how to do things, it is precis
Or - then again - maybe not. ;-)
Elan wrote:
>Hi Romano.
>
>Right. Looks like a 'mold bug. The mold output in this case is:
>
>== {
>make object! [
>first word: 1
>]}
>
>Should be:
>== {
>make object! [
>"first word": 1
>]}
>
>
>Elan.
>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just
Hi Romano.
Right. Looks like a 'mold bug. The mold output in this case is:
== {
make object! [
first word: 1
]}
Should be:
== {
make object! [
"first word": 1
]}
Elan.
Romano Paolo Tenca wrote:
>Hi Elan,
>
>
>
>> >> db: make object! reduce [ to-set-word "first word" 1 to-set-word
> For very small blocks of data, i like the form:
>
> db: [id1 [name "Joe" num 32]]
>
> to be read with
>
> db/id1/name
> db/id1/num
why is it that I missed this path ('select) notation for 4 years?
DOH!
-Max
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi Elan,
> >> db: make object! reduce [ to-set-word "first word" 1 to-set-word
> "second word" 2 ]
but these don't work:
probe do mold make object! reduce [ to-set-word "first word" 1]
probe do mold/all make object! reduce [ to-set-word "first word" 1]
and objects use a little more m
Hi Robert.
My preference for this kind of tasks is using objects. Even though it is
a little more verbose, I find it quite intuitive to use the get and set
functions, as in:
>> db: make object! reduce [ to-set-word "first word" 1 to-set-word
"second word" 2 ]
>> probe db
make object! [
f
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the explanation of your reasoning. Looking at the Core guide,
paths look purpose-built for this sort of database. So your reasons have
good company :^)
Regards,
Brett.
> Hi, there are several reasons:
>
> - For storing data I'm always working with nested blocks of name/val
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:07:21 +1000, Brett Handley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe this situation indicates that the "why" of Robert's need should be
> looked at? So Robert, Why did you want the special set-path form - to
> save your fingers or for some other reason?
Hi, there are several re
Hi Brett,
On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, 12:07:21 PM, you wrote:
BH> .. should instead store the function in the block rather than doing an
BH> internal evaluation on it. That way it becomes more complimentary to Select.
My worry is, that if you need to operate on the previous value,
such a
Hi Gabriele, Robert,
Interesting comments about the Find - I took Robert to mean that he didn't
need to use the word Find in his code or data structure, but I see your
point that evaluation of the path will likely cause an internal search
operation. I'm certainly not defending my code example - i
Hi Robert,
On Tuesday, October 21, 2003, 9:56:23 PM, you wrote:
test: ["Bug Report" 1]
>> == ["Bug Report" 1]
key: "Bug Report"
>> == "Bug Report"
do reduce [to-set-path reduce ['test :key] 1 + test/:key]
>> == ["Bug Report" 2]
test
>> == ["Bug Report" 2]
RMM> Hi Brett, than
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 03:44:30 +1000, Brett Handley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can sort of, but you may not want to :-)
>
>>> test: ["Bug Report" 1]
> == ["Bug Report" 1]
>>> key: "Bug Report"
> == "Bug Report"
>>> do reduce [to-set-path reduce ['test :key] 1 + test/:key]
> == ["Bug Report"
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:30:54 +1000, Anton Rolls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Oh, I see what you're trying to do.
> I agree there seems to be missing a
> native to set the selected value.
Hi, yes correct that's the problem.
> We have SELECT to get the value, but
> we have nothing to set the val
Hi, Robert,
Types are the issue... See below.
Robert M. Münch wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:28:07 +0200, Ingo Hohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> change next pos: find test key pos/2 + 1
>>== []
>> >> test
>>== ["Bug Report" 2]
>>
>>Though I'm sure, someone will come up with a better
Oh, I see what you're trying to do.
I agree there seems to be missing a
native to set the selected value.
We have SELECT to get the value, but
we have nothing to set the value,
except the long solutions so far offered.
Anton.
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:57:52 +1000, Anton Rolls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> test/:key: test/:key + 1
>
> How can I do such a thing? Using to-set-path? I tried but failed. Robert
You can sort of, but you may not want to :-)
>> test: ["Bug Report" 1]
== ["Bug Report" 1]
>> key: "Bug Report"
== "Bug Report"
>> do reduce [to-set-path reduce ['test :key] 1 + test/:key]
==
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:57:52 +1000, Anton Rolls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Robert, which addition operator are you going
> to use :-D
Hi, no comment :-| Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:28:07 +0200, Ingo Hohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're doing both of the above in one line, so the '+ eats away one of
> 'add s arguments
Even in the danger I repeat myself: no comment
> I'd like that, too ;-) But until then, this works:
>
> >> change next pos: fi
Robert, which addition operator are you going
to use :-D
I count two additions, I think you only want one:
add (select test key) 1
or
(select test key) + 1
Anton.
> >> add (select test key) + 1
> ** Script Error: add expected value2 argument of type: number pair char
> money
Robert:
> I would like to write something like this, to increment the integer in the
> block:
>
> test/:key: test/:key + 1
That'd be a great extension to the language.
> How can I do such a thing? Using to-set-path? I tried but failed. Robert
This works, and you could make a function of i
Hi Robert,
Robert M. Münch wrote:
> Hi, I seem to be stucked here:
>
>
>>>test
>
> == ["Bug Report" 1]
>
>>>key
>
> == "Bug Report"
>
>>>type? select test key
>
> == integer!
>
>>>add select test key + 1
>
> ** Script Error: Cannot use add on string! value
> ** Near: add select test key
23 matches
Mail list logo
