Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: Parsing comment

From: rotenca:telvia:it at: 26-Sep-2002 14:37

Hi Gabriele,
> RPT> This is true only if the standard function Load has been called on the > RPT> original string, but Rebol does not require it: > > Of course. :-) But then, any language can be anything, as long as > you read the text with your own parser. ;-)
Again, i'm not so sure. :-) The difference between Rebol and ARexx, for example, is that in the latter your parser must output a string which follow the ARexx syntax rules. In Rebol my parser can directly create Rebol datatypes with the 'to function, by-passing any Load syntax rule. From this point of view, Load syntax is only the syntax of a dialect (the bootstrap dialect). The "true" Rebol language is made of blocks and datatypes not of chars in string, so I can bypass almost all syntax rules about sequences of chars. The only syntax limits are that of the 'to function, which are very relaxed and are about datatypes and not about syntactic sequences of types. Every code in a string is only a dialect which must be translated (compiled) in the true interpreted Rebol language by a function like Load. Final user always works on string dialects, the interpreter only understand the language made of blocks and datatypes. What we believe to be the Rebol language is only one of many possible serializations. String sequence is a layer over the true rebol code, it can be changed without changing the rebol internal syntax (block and datatypes). The existence of the 'to function and of datatypes like set-word or func makes all the Load work only a conventional work (it only calls 'parse and 'to to emulate the human language). --- Ciao Romano word: is not a set-word