----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:35 PM
Subject: [REBOL] Associative Data Store Re:(2)
> I'm probably going to get beaten up for this :), but if my question is
> totally absurd, please excuse my ignorance...
>
> You seem to put a lot of emphasis on being able to use block!s as keys. Is
> this really necessary or desired?
>
> It seems like an implementation would be easier and/or more efficient if
we
> didn't have to worry about that case. Same for logic! values :)
>
> Many other languages get by with just strings for keys, why do we have to
be
> able to use every Rebol data type as a key?
That's true. Even XBase systems work that way. In real - what about any
entry form fiels? They are all strings ... and if not, you can convert to
string first :-)
-pekr-
>
> Keith
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 7:47 AM
> Subject: [REBOL] Associative Data Store Re:
>
>
> > Here's what happened when I tried it:
> >
> > >> blk: []
> > == []
> > >> Associate blk [2 3] 5
> > == [[2 3] [5]]
> > >> Associate? blk [2 3]
> > == none
> >
> > Beg pardon? Also...
> >
> > >> Associate blk 5 7
> > == [[2 3] [5] 5 [7]]
> > >> Associate blk [5] 9
> > == [[2 3] [5] 5 [9]]
> > >> Associate? blk 5
> > == 9
> > >> Associate? blk [5]
> > == 9
> >
> > Hmmm... Can't distinguish 5 from [5] ??
> >
> > >> Associate? blk reduce [2 3]
> > == none
> > >> Associate? blk reduce [[2 3]]
> > == 5
> >
> > Aha! Unlike all other data types, an extra [] wrapper is require
> > for block! -type keys? Well, let's check to see if the old
> > merged-key/value-space bug is still present.
> >
> > >> Associate? blk reduce [[5]]
> > ** Script Error: first expected series argument of type: series
> > pair event money date object port time tuple any-function
> > library struct event.
> > ** Where: all [
> > Value: select Block Key
> > first Value
> > ]
> >
> > So I can't even check to see if [[5]] (or [5]???) might have been
> > legitimately used as a key?
> >
> > This version still uses find and therefore still "inherits" the
> > buggy behavior when block! data are used as keys.
> >
> > -jn-
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > Here's an implementation for an Associative Data Store (ADS) that uses
> only
> > > two functions, doesn't require an object per ADS and can use any Rebol
> value
> > > as a key. Comment invited. Thanks to Gabriele for showing how to
shorten
> the
> > > 'Associate? function.
> > >
> >
> > [code snipped]
>
