[REBOL] Re: [Fwd: Re: RSL: Rebol Standard Library]
From: gjones05:mail:orion at: 24-May-2001 14:07
> From "Joel Neely":
> > As mentioned above, I'd like to see if we can avoid burdening the
> > loadable REBOL code with non-executable content, but at the same
> > time make it easy to supply that *with* the code. For example,
> > a page-long narrative on a non-trivial object, along with usage
> > samples, would be quite a bit of overhead to read through just
> > to load the object def itself, IMHO.
> From: "Chris"
> Hmm.. we're getting into Holy War subjects here ;) I guess stripped
> versions would be good, but as a heavy commenter the idea of
> commentless code is somewhat abhorrent ;))
I guess here, too, I would have to add what I'm envisioning (Chris, get
ready with the telepathic powers so that you can translation for the
rest of the readers ;-). I can envision circumstances where commented
versions would be nice and uncommented versions would suffice. I one
example, if a no-computer-literate consumer/user is running an
application that needs to go to the Internet to get some functional
component from the standard library, comments, just like unused
components, would only serve to diminish bandwidth. If an error occurs
and the app dies, this user would not be likely to persue the code.
However, like some, if I were developing an app that used this
functional component, the comments would be very helpful (at least for a
partially demented person like myself).
<alert type="feature bloat">
I could envision a mechanism, perhaps a flag, where this hypothetical
central server would deliver the correct version based on some
configurable feature or flag.
</alert>
Poor Joel is probably thinking, why did I ever restart this thread. And
poor Maarten is probably thinking that this could have all been done
very simply through LDC. And poor Chris is thinking does this guy really
think I can read his mind? I'm really not in the know like many of you,
so please don't hesitate to ask me to be quiet for a few minutes
(hours/days).
;-)
Thanks for staying tuned.
--Scott Jones
