[REBOL] context of a function Re:(11)
From: lmecir:geocities at: 27-Aug-2000 11:47
Hi,
Galt:
> > I generally find that most of my knowledge of other computer
systems to
> gain insight into rebol is quite helpful and revealing. Even
having the
> context to say, this is like scheme or logo in rebol, but that
is like some
> other language, etc. is all helpful.
>
> > So, yes, it is true that rebol is different in important ways
from other
> languages and therefore you will have to gain a new
understanding. But this
> notion that you would be better off starting from a point of
total ignorance
> and then everything would be easy is patently absurd.
>
> > When I have trouble with Rebol, if I was a less knowledgeable
user I would
> probably just give up. Being able to make some guesses about
possible causes
> or solutions is much better.
> > So, the best way really, is for Rebol to tell us how it works
inside.
> When you know how rebol lists really work, and string literals
and contexts
> and words, then you understand rebol. Ignorance or innocence
isn't much
> help.
>
> > Obviously, one should try never to allow preconceptions and
prejudice to
> inhibit understanding, and that is true of everything, not just
Rebol.
> > I am not a stupid person, even if I am not a genius. I only
got this far
> with Rebol because I am doggedly persistent, not because I have
the
> pleasantly uncluttered mind of an infant.
> > I really like and respect you Andrew, and I appreciate all the
work you
> have done for Rebol and the members of the list. I just didn't
want to let
> this go by yet again...
>
> > Now, this doesn't mean that I am anti-Rebol or want to be
critical or
> whatever. We all love Rebol and want to use it as much as
possible! I
> still don't know how forgetting everything I know is going to
help me figure
> out just what the heck read-io really does and why timeouts
don't seem to
> work as advertised for downloading big files...
>
Andrew:
> I was hindered by my knowledge of other languages. Coming from a
point of
> view of innocence, knowing only human languages, is better I
feel.
> I disagree. The model that Rebol is based on is close to natural
human
> language. Knowing that and knowing nothing of computer languages
is the best
> way to learn Rebol. Rebol works literally as it is. Discussing
in depth,
> contexts and how they work are almost meaningless, particularly
when some
> parts of Rebol are still buggy and need to fixed. I thinking of
the GC bug,
> hopefully that's fixed in the experimental builds.
>
> Change can be hard, but after the change, you wonder, what was
the trouble?
> You're basically trying hard to learn the detail, without
knowing rebol.
Ladislav:
Rebol differs from human languages in some respects. One of them
can be found comparing Rebol Values vs. Human Values (see
http://www.geocities.com/lmecir.geo/evaluation.txt). This may be a
surprise for both experienced and inexperienced programmer,
because that fact is hidden in other programming languages to some
extent. Another difference can be found comparing the behaviour of
Rebol (CQSB/DRP) functions with the behaviour of their Pure CQSB
counterparts (see
http://www.geocities.com/lmecir.geo/contexts.txt). A set of the
differences can be found studying the behaviour of code -
modifying functions like Repeat, Make Object!, Use, Foreach, ...
The latter difference can be considered a bug, of course, but it
is present in Rebol nowadays.
My personal point of view is, that my previous experience with
other programming languages helped me to understand Rebol and
appreciate its advantages.
