[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm really late with this, but this is an easy way to do it, and it
> shows yet another use of modifying "literal" series.
>
> >> e: ['e back reverse "fg"]
> == ['e back reverse "fg"]
> >> print e
> e f
> >> print e
> e g
> >> print e
> e f
>
Excellent! Yet another nail in the coffin of the "L" word! The fourth
element in your definition above is NOT a "literal string" -- there's
no such type. It's just a string, although one that happens to get
initialized with a particularly simple expression. ;-)
Just to prove the point:
>> e: reduce [
[ to-lit-word to-string to-char 101
[ 'back
[ 'reverse
[ join copy to-string to-char 102 to-char 103
[ ]
== ['e back reverse "fg"]
>> print e
e f
>> print e
e g
>> print e
e f
There's so much baggage associated with the idea of "literal" values
in other languages that does not apply in REBOL -- perhaps we really
do need to lose that word.
-jn-
