For help with your code, suggestions and ideas, and learning Red.
Oct 20 2019 22:59
@dockimbel banned @SmackMacDougal
Dec 03 2017 05:53
@PeterWAWood banned @matrixbot
Sep 28 2016 12:19
@PeterWAWood banned @TimeSeriesLord
Aug 13 2016 03:23
@PeterWAWood banned @Vexercizer
I always think that there is an uniform access method in RED or REBOL so I apply the knoledge of blocks in object as when I probe them they actually seem an block with a "make object!" just before.
It's common to abstract a rule and apply it on similar things.
But REDBOL has many so many changes that this method can't be always applied.
There's no literal form of object which may be confusing for some people. But have a look at map!, it has its literal form - #( ... ), so you can't confuse it with block, can you? And objects are more like maps in this regards.
However I think that having uniform access methods make easier to handle the language.
I don't know what you mean for "literal form" but I can imagine
There is uniform access method in form of path: x/y/z, but that does not mean that you can use integers everywhere, only where appropriate.
objects have little to do with blocks. objects are not series.
Literal form is datatype specific syntax.
Map has one, object doesn't.
Yes @moliad but first/second/third or obj/1 ../2 /3 is a method you could apply to object content. In fact in rebol you could use it on the third element of an object. (i.e.: probe first third obj)
@GiuseppeChillemi because third obj in Rebol is equivalent to body-of obj in Red.
z: make object! [b:0c:1d:2]
a first z returning b could be a valid access method.
@9214 Yes, now I have understood
In RED a more explicit and verbose method is used
@GiuseppeChillemi in fact /1 /2 /3 doesn't work in Rebol :smirk: