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

[REBOL] Python vs. Rebol (was the utility of 'bind)

From: tim::johnsons-web::com at: 22-Jan-2004 15:20

* Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch <[maximo--meteorstudios--com]> [040121 15:41]:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tim Johnson [mailto:[tim--johnsons-web--com]] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 5:34 PM > > To: [rebol-list--rebol--com] > > > Subject: [REBOL] Re: the utility of 'bind > > And I find that seeing how different languages handle things > > helps *me* alot. I wrote a 'first function for python that - > > is more verbose than referencing by index but more clear... > > especially when going from a language that references an > > initial element as '1' to one that references an initial > > element as '0'. > > funny, cause I too have some rebol mechanics ported to python... > One notable example is that I have implemented the 'select mechanism > in python (although 0 based). And I use it often. I find its much > easier to handle than poking around with objects and classes for MANY > situations. Plus I have less specifics to remember. If everything > uses lists, then there is less concern to remember all the commands in > dict and tuple datatypes (cause yess they are all individual and many > little things are missing in all of different series datatypes in > python... This alone drives me crazy).
Let's see... On python I use HtmlGen, it's 2723 lines long On python, I use 'ML. The version I'm using is 75 lines or so. Implementation on python is very finicky and much more time-consuming. But I still use Python a lot because some clients require it, and to make a long story short, it's more interoperable with perl. (and definitely more readable) Fortunately, I charge by the hour :-).
> many don't see that rebol not only gives you its distinctive syntax, > but also uses some mechanics and an application design approach which > is different than other languages.
Without going into it and without encouraging argument, I (and that's me now) feel that python does scale better. However, a discliplined rebol programmer can exploit rebol's flexibilty to that end too. Example: rebol's 'out-of-the-box' subroutines automatically creates global words (where in python they are automatically 'local') BUT, I use a rebol 'def which automatically creates local words. compliments of Andrew and Ladislav. Solves that problem. Anyway, I believe that I am preaching to the converted.
> there is something about the universal and consistent rebol way of > thinking which makes many other languages such a pain to learn (like > python).
-- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]><