Yes, an object will only own automatically the series used when creating it. After that, it's up to the user to manually attach/detach series from the object. If you don't want to do the work yourself, you can use
reactor! or deep-reactor! instead, which provide general event handlers for that: https://github.com/red/red/blob/master/environment/reactivity.red#L30 (you can also extract the relevant lines from there and build your own event handler, and bypass the reactive stuff to improve performance).
Like, I don't know,
own new function inside -change* or something like that.
I see your edited message, thanks! @nedzadarek :point_up:
omg.. I'm at a loss guys
collect1: :collect
collect2: func spec-of :collect body-of :collect
profile/count/show [
[collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
[collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
] 10000Count: 10000
Time | Time (Per) | Memory | Code
0:00:00.138 | 0:00:00 | 8978432 | [collect1 [repeat i n [keep i]]]
0:00:00.214 | 0:00:00 | 11243520 | [collect2 [repeat i n [keep i]]]is magick at work here?
@hiiamboris Interesting!
>> profile/count/show [[collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]] 10000
Count: 10000
Time | Time (Per) | Memory | Code
0:00:00.123 | 0:00:00 | 8978432 | [collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.131 | 0:00:00 | 8978432 | [collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.184 | 0:00:00 | 11243520 | [collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
>> profile/count/show [[collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]] 10000
Count: 10000
Time | Time (Per) | Memory | Code
0:00:00.123 | 0:00:00 | 8978432 | [collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.125 | 0:00:00 | 6877184 | [collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.183 | 0:00:00 | 11243520 | [collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
>> profile/count/show [[collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]][collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]] 10000
Count: 10000
Time | Time (Per) | Memory | Code
0:00:00.122 | 0:00:00 | 6877184 | [collect1 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.123 | 0:00:00 | 8978432 | [collect [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
0:00:00.195 | 0:00:00 | 11243520 | [collect2 [repeat i 10 [keep i]]]
moreover in all tests of compiled vs interpreted code I've tried - interpreted was faster by 20% or so ;)
@hiiamboris
moreover in all tests of compiled vs interpreted code I've tried - interpreted was faster by 20% or so ;)
That would be odd, I suspect something is flawed with your measurement method. Remember that blocks of code run by do cannot be compiled (by design, as it's the way to invoke the interpreter).
@dockimbel cool! I didn't know we can reflect the source of compiled funcs.
And you're right, I was using loop N [do code] since the compiler won't let me compile loop N code, so that explains it all, thanks!
Just checked:
x: 0
f: does [x: x + 1]
t: [now/precise/time/utc]
t1: do t
loop 1000000 [f]
t2: do t
print t2 - t1is really about 2x faster when compiled
Imbued
collecta bit with more magic :) Faster, less allocation-prone. Makes sense only for compiled code though or for small collections (n < 10) https://gist.github.com/hiiamboris/a624c3d767dfe4e4ed20f23bc96433ff
@hiiamboris I'm confused about your usage of
How do you modify an
also. Why not just body': body coll': coll' shoot :keep coll?How do you modify an
owner the series/object? noneing old's owner works fine but when I try to modify new series I get access violation at the last line (reverse/part r/a 2):r: make object! [
a: [1 2 3]
b: [4 5 6]
on-deep-change*: func [owner word target action new index part][
print ['on-deep-change* tab word]
]
on-change*: func [word old new][
print ['on-change* tab word]
unless all [block? :old block? :new same? head :old head :new][
if any [series? :old object? :old][modify old 'owned none]
if any [series? :new object? :new][modify new 'owned reduce [self word]]
]
]
]
reverse/part r/a 2
r/a: [3 2 1] ; <-- set field to a new series which object does not 're-owns'
reverse/part r/a 2
@GiuseppeChillemi as fair I remember functions are anonymous but you can create "function creator" that have function name, something like this:
named-func: func [_func-name spec body] [func spec bind body context [func-name: _func-name] ]
foo: named-func 'foo [a b] [probe a + b probe func-name]
foo 2 3
; 5
; foo
you can use
set so you don't have to repeat yourself (foo: named-func 'foo):named-func2: func [_func-name spec body] [set _func-name func spec bind body context [func-name: _func-name] ]
named-func2 'qux [a b] [probe a + b probe func-name]
qux 2 3
; 5
; qux
@GiuseppeChillemi functions are anonymous and can be referred by multiple words, so "name" is not the best term.
>> foo: has [dummy][print pick find body-of system/words context? 'dummy -1]
== func [/local dummy][print pick find body-of system/words context? 'dummy -1]
>> foo
foo
You can keep a word from context other than
system/words to be more flexible.
there is
default function in Rebol, that does exactly this:>> ?? default
default: func [
{Set a word to a default value if it hasn't been set yet.}
'word [word! set-word! lit-word!] "The word (use :var for word! values)"
value "The value"
][
unless all [value? word not none? get word] [set word :value] :value
]
But your function won't work,
count will be local, initialized to none and never set to 0.
This would work:
counter: function [/extern count][
if not value? 'count [count: 0]
count: count + 1
]
@githubnyn You're welcome. See also https://github.com/red/red/wiki/Closures , because closure is what you want to use for such function.
call does not seem to work e.g call "notepad.exe" , using windows 10. am I calling it correctly ?
'''
red>> call explorer.exe
Script Error: call has no value
Where: catch
red>> call/shell "notepad.exe"
Script Error: call has no value
Where: catch
red>> help call
Word call is not defined
'''