Another fragment in the continuing dialogue.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> My problem with what you are doing here is not so much where you are
> heading. It is the reason you give for heading there. You see, you
> formulate two different things,
>
> 1. inserting a value into a series and
> 2. returning a series at its next position
>
> as one anonymous action, namely "doing something":
>
Clearly I need to apologize for not expressing myself clearly ;-) I
think I should give up after this attempt, or risk being deafened by
the flurry of plonks!
http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=jargon&Query=plonk
My concern is with "doing something", but with clearly identifying
what operand it is being done to. The text quoted above shows an
example of the same issue; both numbered items refer to "a series"
but the two uses have subtly different meanings. Given:
a: next "123456"
b: next next a
I suggest that there are three entities of interest:
i) one which we get at via the variable 'a
ii) one which we get at via the variable 'b
iii) one which we can't get (directly) but which corresponds to a
copy of the literal string "123456"
These three entities are distinct. I think it's accurate to state
that iii) is an anonymous data entity (whether it even HAS an index
is moot, as it is inaccessible), while i) and ii) are named
entities with individual/distinct indices that share the data
contained in iii).
Performing {a: next a} changes something that is specific to 'a,
while performing {append a "?"} changes something shared by 'a and 'b
without changing anything that is specific to 'a. The remarks quoted
above are consistent with REBOL documentation in that the phrase
"a series" sometimes means 1) the underlying data [which may be
shared with other references], and sometimes means 2) a particular
index [which AFAIK is never shared] into a data sequence.
For clarity of communication, and ease of learning by newcomers,
I'm simply proposing that:
A) each language concept should have one unique name/term
(although explanations and tutorials obviously will use a
variety of descriptions)
B) each name/term should refer to one unique concept.
I believe this somewhat purist approach is compatible with the
philosophy of a minimalist/elegant language such as REBOL.
-jn-
