On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 1:48 PM, William Tanksley, Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Okay, thanks to the current builds, I was able to work this out. BTW, > I typed "fry" about, read for a while, clicked a hyperlink, and then > was unable to get back to what I'd been reading (it had been pushed > into a tiny subwindow, entirely useless for reading). Annoying.
Click 'Listener' at the top to close the documentation browser. > Underscore is meaningful only inside a procedure/quotation; this is > why it's not supported for arrays. Inside a fried quotation, it means > that the quotation will begin with an >r, and the underscore will be > replaced by a r>. In other words, at runtime one stack item will be > safely hidden from the quotation until the _. > > I can see why it's there, I think. I don't like it. It's prettier than >>r/r>, but it seems to me to do something entirely different from what > fry's other words do. The fact that it doesn't make sense inside a > bake seems to me to hint that it doesn't quite belong. (I'm also > suspecting that unlike @ and comma, it also doesn't make sense inside > a nested fry-quotation; although I don't know whether these are > supported yet, I know they're desired.) The underscore is equivalent to using dip. '[ , _ foo ] ' [ [ , ] dip foo ] Slava ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW! Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project, along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08 _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
