> how about:
> help probe ->>
> "Prints a molded, unevaluated value and returns the same
> value. similar: ? ??
> dump"
YESS A "RELATED:" or "SEE ALSO:" WOULD BE SO USEFULL IN ALL RT Function defs.
AND A CLASSIFICATION ID TOO ... like in the ref-words doc where there the words are
split
Tuesday, May 4, 2004, 4:48:10 AM, Volker wrote:
> Now instead of "send" i could not resist to press "hack", and here
> is:
thanks for sharing!
i found it exciting that this piece of code uses loads of typical
REBOL idioms - i.e. it can be considered a piece of REBOL wizardry :)
> ;the code
>
On Montag, 3. Mai 2004 23:23, Gregg Irwin wrote:
> Hi Anton, Andreas, et al
>
> Any other candidate host functions that map to this functionality?
>
> GI> What about a refinement on PROBE that makes it produce DUMPed
> GI> output?
>
probe/dump - longer to type. when i debug i want it short. even
Hi Anton, Andreas, et al
AR> I'd like probe to remain the simple function
AR> that it is. Something beautiful about it.
I agree that simple is beautiful; if we can simplify all the code
that uses this functionality, even at the expense of a little added
complexity inside, that's a gain IMO. Of c
Gregg, I'd like probe to remain the simple function
that it is. Something beautiful about it.
(I think, because there is nowhere for bugs to hide
in there..:)
Anton.
> Hi Anton,
>
> AR> Please consider that molded code should be able to be
> AR> loaded back by rebol. So I say no.
> AR> I have n
I was thinking the dump-bin output could be made
loadable again, therefore achieving orthogonality:
what can be molded can also be loaded.
The output could be changed like so:
dump-bin to-binary "abc"
make binary! #{6162 63} ; : abc
dump-bin to-binary "all the king's horses and all the kin
Monday, May 3, 2004, 11:54:45 AM, Gregg wrote:
> This is interesting. I've always thought of PROBE as "show me the
> value" where the inlining aspect was the big benefit, but that it
> didn't add as much as it could for certain types of values (e.g.
> binary! and bitset!).
that's interesting in
Hi Max,
MOA> especially since we often insert a probe within a line to get
MOA> status at that moment, like just before an assignment... dump-bin
MOA> would break that behaviour.
It shouldn't, unless I'm missing something. What it displays and what
it returns are two different things.
MOA> that
> Are you saying that because that's how PROBE currently works
> (i.e. the molded result is exactly what is displayed)? We wouldn't
> be affecting molded code in general, only what PROBE prints out. The
> value given to PROBE would be returned just as it is today.
that would make probe a little o
:-)
-MAx
- Original Message -
From: "Romano Paolo Tenca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: probe/dump-binary survey
>
> Hi,
>
> > Please consider that molded code should be able to be
Hi Anton,
AR> Please consider that molded code should be able to be
AR> loaded back by rebol. So I say no.
AR> I have no real objection to including dump-bin named as is
AR> though.
Are you saying that because that's how PROBE currently works
(i.e. the molded result is exactly what is displayed)
Hi,
> Please consider that molded code should be able to be
> loaded back by rebol. So I say no.
I agree.
Could be an help service.
---
Ciao
Romano
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
Please consider that molded code should be able to be
loaded back by rebol. So I say no.
I have no real objection to including dump-bin named as is
though.
Anton.
> Jaime et al
>
> JV> Greg, I think your suggestion that probe should produce output
> JV> similar to dump-bin by default is great.
13 matches
Mail list logo
