Hi Andrew,
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Andrew Pennebaker
wrote:
> I agree, we should prefer USING for all imports. Why does Factor still have
> USE when USING is more comprehensive?
USE: is mostly intended for interactive use. In the listener,
USE: foo
is more concise than
USING: foo ;
I agree, we should prefer USING for all imports. Why does Factor still have
USE when USING is more comprehensive?
Cheers,
Andrew Pennebaker
www.yellosoft.us
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Slava Pestov wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Pennebaker
> wrote:
> > I
On Aug 19, 2011, at 9:46 PM, Slava Pestov wrote:
> Well, using vocabulary roots you can use USING: for everything. Read
> the article I linked you to, it's pretty easy to add your own
> directories to the search path.
Well, Andrew is objecting to a couple of things with how the vocab loader work
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Andrew Pennebaker
wrote:
> It would really be neat if you didn't have to use INCLUDE/INCLUDING for user
> code and USE/USING for Factor's standard library code.
Well, using vocabulary roots you can use USING: for everything. Read
the article I linked y
On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:30 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> It would really be neat if you didn't have to use INCLUDE/INCLUDING for user
> code and USE/USING for Factor's standard library code.
The differences are:
- INCLUDE: looks only in the current directory; USE: looks in the search path
- INC
Egads, it works! Thanks to Joe, John, and Slava, I've made a little macro
pair that emulates Ruby's "require" in Factor's USE/USING fashion.
$ cat ~/.factor-rc
! Andrew Pennebaker
! INCLUDE/INCLUDING macros that import source code files in the current
directory
USING: kernel vocabs.loader parser
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Andrew Pennebaker
wrote:
> Is there an import command that doesn't require moving my files into the
> Factor work directory?
> I like version controlling my scripts and it would be a pain to copy them
> from my git directory over to work and back.
Take
Try with a string:
INCLUDE: "scriptedmain"
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Andrew Pennebaker <
andrew.penneba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to tweak INCLUDE so that it appends ".factor" for you (and
> thereby looks more natural, like USE/USING).
>
> $ cat ~/.factor-rc
> ! An "INCLUDE" mac
I'm trying to tweak INCLUDE so that it appends ".factor" for you (and
thereby looks more natural, like USE/USING).
$ cat ~/.factor-rc
! An "INCLUDE" macro that imports source code files in the current directory
USING: accessors io.pathnames namespaces source-files vocabs.loader parser
sequences ;
You could define this syntax word:
SYNTAX: INCLUDE: scan-object parse-file append ;
Then use it:
INCLUDE: foo.factor
It adds all words from foo.factor into the current vocab.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Andrew Pennebaker <
andrew.penneba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Could you tweak th
Could you tweak the RELATIVE macro so that it doesn't require blob.factor to
be in blob/ ?
Cheers,
Andrew Pennebaker
www.yellosoft.us
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Joe Groff wrote:
>
> On Aug 19, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
>
> The RELATIVE trick looks promising. Though, it g
On Aug 19, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> The RELATIVE trick looks promising. Though, it gives me an error.
>
> scriptedmain.factor
> https://github.com/mcandre/scriptedmain/blob/master/scriptedmain.factor
>
> test.factor
> https://github.com/mcandre/scriptedmain/blob/master/test.
The RELATIVE trick looks promising. Though, it gives me an error.
scriptedmain.factor
https://github.com/mcandre/scriptedmain/blob/master/scriptedmain.factor
test.factor
https://github.com/mcandre/scriptedmain/blob/master/test.factor
$ ./test.factor
Loading /Users/andrew/.factor-rc
./test.factor
On Aug 19, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> The parse-time trick is helpful, but it's not perfect. I'm getting an error:
>
> Generic word length does not define a method for the source-file class.
Oops, that was a typo on my part. Should be:
<<
USING: accessors io.pathnames namespa
The parse-time trick is helpful, but it's not perfect. I'm getting an error:
Generic word length does not define a method for the source-file class.
If you're familiar with Ruby's "require" or Python's "import", they look in
the user's current directory, i.e.
C:\CoolStuff\> python coolstuff.py
On Aug 19, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> There must be a more dynamic way than configuring Factor for every piece of
> code I write. What if Factor interpreted "." as the directory from which
> Factor was called?
If you're trying to load modules relative to a main script file, a
On Aug 19, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> There must be a more dynamic way than configuring Factor for every piece of
> code I write. What if Factor interpreted "." as the directory from which
> Factor was called?
I'm not sure what you mean by "the directory from which Factor was
There must be a more dynamic way than configuring Factor for every piece of
code I write. What if Factor interpreted "." as the directory from which
Factor was called?
Cheers,
Andrew Pennebaker
www.yellosoft.us
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Joe Groff wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2011, at 11:35 AM, A
On Aug 19, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> I made ~/.factor-roots with a dot (.) to indicate it should search the
> current directory for Factor files, but it doesn't seem to help.
>
> Is there a way to add the current directory to ~/.factor-roots similar to
> Java's CLASSPATH?
"
I made ~/.factor-roots with a dot (.) to indicate it should search the
current directory for Factor files, but it doesn't seem to help.
Is there a way to add the current directory to ~/.factor-roots similar to
Java's CLASSPATH?
Cheers,
Andrew Pennebaker
www.yellosoft.us
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at
On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:26 AM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> Is there an import command that doesn't require moving my files into the
> Factor work directory?
>
> I like version controlling my scripts and it would be a pain to copy them
> from my git directory over to work and back.
As Doug indicat
On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Doug Coleman wrote:
> You can add your own vocabulary root, and if you put it in .factor-boot-rc
> then it will get run every time you bootstrap:
.factor-boot-rc only gets loaded once when you rebuild Factor. A better idea is
to list your root directories in ~/.fac
You can add your own vocabulary root, and if you put it in .factor-boot-rc then
it will get run every time you bootstrap:
USE: vocabs.loader
"/Users/erg/sekrets" add-vocab-root
Doug
On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:26 AM, Andrew Pennebaker wrote:
> Is there an import command that doesn't require moving m
Is there an import command that doesn't require moving my files into the
Factor work directory?
I like version controlling my scripts and it would be a pain to copy them
from my git directory over to work and back.
Cheers,
Andrew Pennebaker
www.yellosoft.us
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 3:28 AM, John
Hi Andrew,
It would help if you attached some code, but you should be able to get your
code to work if you put the files in the "work" folder of Factor like this:
/work/ant/ant.factor
/work/antfarm/antfarm.factor
When you "USE: ant", it will look through the vocabulary roots ("core",
"basis", "e
25 matches
Mail list logo
