But then this (the example below) explicitly lists the refinements in the
function body. I think the "ultimate" solution would process an arbitray
list, as with a loop. It is fairly short though :) and IS a step up from
'if statements, esp for more than 2 refinements.
- Michael Jelinek
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/15/2000 04:04:34 PM
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 09/15/2000 04:04 PM
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: [REBOL] best means of passing refinements from main to helper
function? Re:(2)
Howdy, Michael:
The following approach is exactly elegant, but it gets the
job done and it's fairly short. I think it's kind of cute.
-jeff
REBOL []
deduction: func [
/use-month month-to-use
/use-day day-to-use
][
rejoin [ "file-"
either use-month [ month-to-use ] [ now/month ]
either use-day [ day-to-use ] [ now/day ]
]
]
main: func [
/use-month month-to-use
/use-day day-to-use
] [
go?: func ['what /it][either it: get what [either true = it [what][it]]
[]]
do reduce compose/deep [to-path [deduction (go? use-month) (go?
use-day)]
(go? month-to-use) (go? day-to-use)]
]
> This seems to be an occasionally reoccurring topic. In
> short I don't think anyone has come up with a simple
> elegant way of doing this. A few of us have come up with
> solutions which involve building the helper-function
> call/refinements string. You might find, however, that you
> would rather use a bunch of 'if statements.
>
> - Michael Jelinek
>
>
>
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]@MailAndNews.com> on 09/15/2000
> 03:30:03 PM
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@MailAndNews.com on
> 09/15/2000 03:30 PM
>
> Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Sent by: Terrence Brannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: [REBOL] best means of
> passing refinements from main to helper
> function?
>
>
> I want to know the best way to propagate refinement
> selections (or their lack) to a function which actually
> does the processing for them.
