[REBOL] Re: What language am I looking for?
From: dean:clockwork-technologies:ab:ca at: 13-May-2001 0:53
For me, the eternal quest has always been "What languages (plural) am I looking for?"
As a
programmer, I've used more languages than I can keep track of myself, from various dialects
of
Assembler to 4GLs, and everything in between, and I am convinced that no one language,
not even
REBOL, is the magic bullet that will replace all else.
I've spent only a short time working with REBOL, but can definitely see a place for it
in my toolbox.
Here's my concrete example: My current employer (I am a contractor) is in the midst
of getting rid of
their old, underpowered mainframe and replacing it with a sleek new Sun box. Our current
slate of
COBOL programs is being re-compiled to work on the new platform. I connect to both the
mainframe
and the Sun through my desktop PC, which runs Windows NT. The mainframe and the new
Sun box
do not directly speak to one another.
Because the systems are isolated from one another, testing is a chore. Steps are: 1)
Run a slate of
programs on the mainframe. 2) Copy the data files from the mainframe to my PC (via Windows
FTP --
yuck). 3) Copy the same files from my PC to the Sun box. 4) Run the same test slate
on the Sun.
Using my PC as a way-station is most annoying. REBOL, however, allows me to essentially
copy
directly from the mainframe to the Sun box, and compresses steps 2 and 3 into a single,
more
homogenous step. The script took all of 10 minutes to write and is extremely fast to
run. Yes, yes, I
realise that my PC is still a way station, but using a REBOL script makes the whole transfer
process
much more invisible.
>From what I've seen, REBOL excels in situations where files are spread across a network,
but still
need to be easily accessed. The built in protocols (FTP, HTTP, POP, etc) really help
to make a
heterogeneous network much simpler to work with. The other strength lies in the fact
that it's scripted,
not compiled. For the numerous quick and dirty jobs I need to do, scripting languages
simply make
more sense than ones I need to compile. I can write the script, run it, and then throw
it away if I know
I'll never need it again. Simplicity itself. I'd certainly write REBOL scripts over,
say Perl scripts any
day.
Does all of this mean I'm going to throw away my beloved Smalltalk compiler? Hardly.
Would I go to
my employer and suggest that they rewrite their current COBOL applications in REBOL?
Not in this
lifetime! If anyone were to ask me what language I would use to write a large business
system, I'd say
COBOL, every time. If someone were then to ask me what language they should use to manipulate
and share files across a networked environment, I'd certainly mention REBOL. Ask me
about some
other situation, and I might well say that Smalltalk is by far the best choice.
Every language has its purpose. For me, the better question is: Does REBOL fit in your
toolkit? From
what little I've used, it certainly fits in mine.
This was rather longer than I had hoped. Sorry, all...
Regards,
Dean Powell
Edmonton, Canada
Original message from: "Ken Anthony"
