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

[REBOL] Re: rebol/base

From: gscottjones:mchsi at: 30-Sep-2002 9:36

Hi, Mike, From: Mike
> Does anyone else think the naming of base and core > are reversed? Seems that core would be the smallest, > 'core' piece of rebol, and base would add features on > top of the core.
A similar thought occurred to me in regard to /View. In retrospect, REBOL/View could have been the "core" of the gui features, and REBOL/VID (or REBOL/View/VID) the loaded version. Product confusion would (and should) exclude this option at this point. Besides, /VID would not then adequately convey the other bundled features (schemes, etc). Given that it is unlikely that RT would be bold and brazen enough to _rename_ current products, then I personally would gravitate more toward: REBOL/Face (originally proposed by Chris RG. IIRC) or incorporating a variation on Laurence G's suggestion (REBOL/Baseview): REBOL/Base/Face Did anyone mention the following? (other possibilities) REBOL/GUI or REBOL/GDI or, by extension of the path/refinement concept: REBOL/Base/GUI REBOL/Base/GDI These later two suffer from a conceptual incongruity by suggesting that /GUI and /GDI are already incorporated within REBOL/Base. Maybe those two should be nixed on talking it out. :-)
> I don't know what that means for > the /view question. Maybe /viewcore and /view? > or /view and /view+ > Just please not view++ :-)
Or even just REBOL/Viewbase, incorporating Laurence's and Mike's ideas. In a tribute to the dark side, will we eventually see REBOL/ECMA? Answer: REBOL/ECMA.NOT :-) --Scott Jones