[REBOL] Re: The truth about scope
From: berniegs:prodigy at: 13-Apr-2005 11:40
Hi Gabriele,
Yes, that's it! Your explanation is quite clear, and I really
appreciate it.
> And I think this is the source of all your problems: REBOL has
no
> "scope". As long as you think in terms of scope, you may get
into
> problems.
>
> Now, REBOL gives you the illusion of having something
like a
> "scope" for "variables". This is just an illusion that is
there
> because it is useful to let new users think that way. You
don't
> have to learn all at once, but can learn one step at a time.
When I was just starting with Rebol several years ago, I asked
on this forum (or whatever list was active then) if I could
safely consider Rebol contexts as the equivalent of scopes in
other languages. The answer I received was that I could do that
for most purposes. Well, now I'm finding that the answer was the
truth, but only up to a point, and now I need to know the "real
truth". As you just pointed out, scope is an illusion, and
thinking in those terms has indeed gotten me into trouble.
I think that it would be appropriate to include an expansion of
what you've written here as an appendix to the Rebol User's
Guide. It could be considered as something of a Rebol "theory of
operation guide", or something like that. It wouldn't be
necessary for a beginner to study it, but it would be there for
others wishing to get into more advanced applications. I think
it would be an extremely helpful contribution to the Rebol
documentation.
> If you think everything it's clear up to here, I'll go on
and
> explain what binding means.
Yes, it's much clearer now. You did a great job. Please continue
with contexts and bindings.
Best regards,
Bernie Schneider
The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being
overwhelmed
by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try
it, you will
be lonely often and sometimes frightened. But no price is too
high to pay
for the privilege of owning yourself.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche --
