[REBOL] Re: OT, was Re: What's Native
From: ed:brittlestar at: 23-Jun-2004 8:05
Gabriele wrote:
> That's what someone that does not know REBOL and Carl Sassenrath
> would say. But, Carl isn't like that. Usability always comes first
> in REBOL. You see, why would you need so many datatypes while
> other languages just have a few? Why do we have READ and WRITE
> while OPEN-COPY-INSERT-CLOSE would be enough?
I think the usability of REBOL is quite high. However, some programmers
can't get comfortable the free-form, no-punctuation syntax, or that you
sometimes need know to open a port instead of using READ, etc.
> That quote simply isn't right. Java is just bloat, REBOL is just
> simple. These are two different concepts, though probably they're
> hard to fit in some minds. ;)
Simplicity is subjective. It's about balance. Einstein is quoted as saying
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
The end
of that quote implies a warning.
I'm also reminded of Matz' talk about the philosophy of Ruby (see Simplicity
is NOT a Goal
http://www.rubyist.net/~matz/slides/oscon2003/mgp00047.html from
http://www.rubyist.net/~matz/slides/oscon2003/):
Simplicity is NOT a goal:
- Things too simple are complex
- Things too complex are difficult
- Human thoughts are not simple
- Programs are essentially complex
- Combination of simple concepts can be complex very easily
> Never forget, REBOL has a nice flat surface, but you'll never know
> how deep it is unless you submerge.
I agree. I think it's just a case of people having different worldviews, and
the difficulties of understanding one another.
// Ed
