cause its a typo? hehehe
sorry, just put a word normally, I don't know why I put a litteral. as pekr pointed out, remove-each is one of the fastest iterators (or a couple of internal reasons). when you have filtering to do, on data which is not reused a second time, and no copy is needed, remove-each is always the fastest way to scream through a block. if you must copy the data set for eventual reuse, then some profiling is needed, and the details of the algorythm, might put parse in front, but as a rule of thumb, use remove-each when you can :-). -MAx On Nov 30, 2007 12:39 AM, Kai Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Max ~ > > I don't grasp why you use 'item "literally" - can you explain > why? > > Kai > > > > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:04:28 -0500, Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch wrote: > > hi kai > > > > you might want to copy the block and use remove-each, its a very fast= > iterator, and expressly > > built for filtering. > > > > remove-each 'item copy ["a" 1 2 4 "f"] [integer? item] > > > > =3D=3D ["a" "f"] > > > > using any or all in the evaluated block, is a very dense way to do= > multi-rule filtering > > > > remove-each 'item copy ["a" 1 2 4 "f"] [ > > any [ > > all [integer? item item > 3] > > all [string? item find item "a"] > > ] > > ] > > > > =3D=3D [1 2 "f"] > > > > also, just adding a 'NOT in front of the 'ANY, reverses the filter, > which= > is handy if you want to > > split the same incongruous data set into two pieces. > > > > -MAx > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to > lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject. > > -- To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
