Chalz, Instead of using AND and OR, the better REBOL way is ALL and ANY. Try this:
if all [2 = length? p: parse filename "." find pick p 2 "htm"][...] I left off the "not none?" in front of the 'find because 'none automatically gets evaluated as 'false but a successful 'find (which returns an index into the series) is evaluated as 'true. You can embed ANYs and ALLs inside of each other if you have a more complex statement. I do it all the time. There are other neat uses for ANY and ALL (in particular), but I hope you get the point for this example. Later! -Bo Lechnowsky Technical Consulting REBOL VAR At 11:51 PM 7/1/02 -0400, you wrote: > Here's a little question. Perhaps I've been spoiled in other > languages, but >this is starting to frustrate me. I have something like: > if THIS and THAT [] >Thing is, if THIS is false, it continues to evaluate THAT anyways. What's the >point? The result is obviously false anyways. I'm working on a case like >this >(perhaps someone can provide a more elegant solution): > if (2 = length? p: parse filename ".") AND (not none? find pick p 2 "htm") >[ ... >Obviously, if the first condition is false, I want it to quit without >evaluating the second condition. Help? Any way I can continue doing this in >the same line, and without worrying about throwing and catching errors? Or am >I more or less doomed to yet another nested if? Thanks folks. > >--Charles > >-- >To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the >subject, without the quotes. -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
