[REBOL] Re: Windows GUI apps: Rebol/SDK vs. Visual C++ 2003
From: jjmmes:yaho:o:es at: 25-Jan-2003 2:13
> What you like is very important (at least to me).
> Different langugages
> resonate with different minds. I've only been
> developing software for
> about 14 years now, so I'm not a real old timer, but
> I've looked at a
> lot of langauges over that time. I try to match
> tools to needs. If I'm
> going to specialize (and I do), I pick a tool that
> will be as
> generally applicable as possible, and have a plan
> for how to augment
> it, or know when to direct people somewhere else.
> I've only been
> REBOLing for a year and a half now.
What you like determines the motivation you have and
without great motivation is impossible to do great
things. You certainly have more experience than I do.
I like to also pick tools and match them to the needs.
Rebol matches the following needs (for me):
1) glue code
2) prototyping. Imposible to do anything where
performance matters.
3) potentially a great GUI tool
> When you say "low cost of development", do you mean
> the cost of the
> actual tools, the cost of your time in developing
> the products, or a
> combination of the two? Just something to think
> about.
Both, but above all is the gut feeling that you're
picking the right tool or that has momentum (marketing
people say "that it has momentum" to imply it's not a
dead end). Unfortunately there are many "great"
technical things that are dead ends -> Betamax
> When VB came
> out, and for a good while after, when I'd propose it
> as a solution,
> people would say "But C is 15-200% faster than VB!";
> I'd reply that VB
> was actually much *faster* than an equivalent C app
> - usually 6-12
> months faster. :)
In most cases time to market is more important than
actual performance. Most client apps have enough
performance.
I think the case for C++ is more recent. I really see
C and C++ as very different (although most people
don't because C++ is a superset of C).
Any serious/complex (in terms of functionality)
Windows app is written in C++. C++ is a lot more than
OO. There are many new concepts: STL, Generic
Programming, Design Patterns, Generic Patterns to
build reusable libraries, ... Do not want to critizice
but haven't found any new concept in Rebol that didn't
exist in OO or functional languages . Better
implementation of the concepts, definetely yes, that
is the innovation, and many times this type of process
innovation can make a company really successful
On the GUI side there might be lots of innovation but
I don't know !
I first read Carl's statement that OO wasn't it, and
messaging/dialects was a better paradigm, but really,
now, I think that you can use a tool like OO pccts,
http://www.antlr.org, and build any parser (for any
grammar) you want and for serious parsing I wouldn't
bet on Rebol's parse BNF. There is a lot more than
that and if you want to find a solution to an
important problem you have to dig deeper.
Rebol does have the simplicity that comes from
scripting and the elegant syntax ..
> j> Are you interested in a particular subject, e.g.
> j> finite-state machines, google and you'll find
> serious
> j> c++ libraries for it. Math requirements, the same
> ...
> me is how REBOL allows me to think and how I'll
> build software with it
> when I really start to "get it". My FSM engine was
> one of the things
> that started to open my eyes a bit, but I won't bore
> everyone here
> with details; mail me directly and I'll just bore
> you. :) In any case,
> most languages aren't concerned with solving the
> problems that I want
> to see solved, but REBOL is.
You can think using a piece of paper. The language is
implementation. You're one of the top guys here so it
doesn't sound good to hear "when I really start to get
it". I don't believe that, the more you "talk" in a
language the better you communicate but you rarely do
great things suddenly because you use that language vs
other .. This has some analogies with writers and
their masterpieces .. Every language has its ++ and --
but there is no silver bullet.
I'll mail you separately on FSM. The problem that
Rebol solves is being glue (that is if you have
command). A better bash ! On the GUI side it could be
a lot more ..
> j> Not sure whether Rebol is MOP or non MOP !
>
> It's a proprietary language at this time, as I think
> it should be.
Don't care about this. It's all about making the right
choices for the job you have to handle.
> How can you explain VB's success in that light? No
> standard there. :)
I can explain: VB success is mostly a result of good
marketing judgement and maybe some good technical
decisions, but certainly a lot of business strategy ..
De facto standards, like TCP/IP or VB are most
important but C++ is the rare case where a committee
std is important, relevant .. and companies like MS
can not write the rules completely ...
> The question is not whether VC7 is compliant, but
> whether it's better
> *because* it's compliant.
Lippmann, the MS VC++ architect explains this in an
interview. In a nutshell, it's better because there
are a ton of libraries conforming to the std that you
can use and you couldn't before
Good brainstorm !
___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Móviles
Personaliza tu móvil con tu logo y melodía favorito
en http://moviles.yahoo.es
