Hi Gabriele,

> You'd  have  to  handle  circular  references  by  yourself. Also,
> preserving   non-object  contexts  is  not  trivial  and  probably
> impossible in the general case. (Ladislav has some examples of how
> to list the words in a given context, but AFAIK they look for them
> in  SYSTEM/WORDS,  so  if you have "loaded" the word without using
> LOAD  they  wouldn't be able to find it.) Another problem would be
> how  to  handle native functions (or actions etc.), that cannot be
> molded.

Each answer seem to bring up new questions again ;)

What exactly do you mean by "loading" words without using 'load ?
Do you mean that (for example) something like "test: 5" defines a word named
test of type integer? and with value the number five and that this word is not
stored in the system/ words but in an internal non accessible list of words ?

LG>> If I am right this would allow a kind of persistent rebol environment : 'molding
LG>> system before quitting and 'loading it a few days later and finding the
LG>> environment exactly in the same state. That could have many applications.

> That's  what  you  get with FORTH. I don't think it is possible in
> REBOL in the general case, but you could do it "partially".

I guess that by "partially" you mean "only for the context that your script(s)
have knowledge of" ?
Would that mean that, for example, one would have to store all code and data
within a single object to make sure everything he needs is correctly restored
(puting aside the need to handle circular references properly) ?

->>> Just 'loading carefully molded data containing only what's needed for a
LG>> specific use. Would this be possible ?

> Well,  that's  what you do when you write a script --- i.e. you're
> writing carefully molded data. :-)

How could I not see it ???
I lack vitamins for sure ;)

Regards,
Laurent

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the 
subject, without the quotes.

Reply via email to