> << After a few days with Python I am wondering how to 'pickle' Rebol objects? >>>
> I guess that depends on exactly what your needs are. With REBOL, you have a > number of options. You can MOLD objects and then write them out, you can > write out just the spec block for them, you can serialize things out as > blocks - or any data really - even if they aren't objects. This is one of > those things that is so simple in REBOL, it makes you forget how hard it is > in other languages (i.e. that they have to provide serialization mechanisms > which were probably a lot of work for them to write :). The great benefit of > code/data duality shines bright. > SAVE and MOLD both have an /ALL refinement now which creates a "true" > serialized format. One recent thread on the list insisted on the fact that nothing in rebol can be evaluated correctly outside of its original context (if I understood correctly). So reading your answer I wonder if this applies to objects printed with 'mold ? Is it possible for such objects to contain a different content when loaded back into a different context than the one they were "saved" from ? And if this possible context "confusion" exists is there any way to make sure that objects are saved along with all the necessary context ? Note that I am not writing any code related to the subject, I am just curious ;) Also I did not manage to see what was exactly the difference beetween doing "do load mold/all" and simply doing "do load mold" in your example. Both seems to produce the same result, so what benefit does the /all exactly bring in that case ? Best regards, Laurent -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
