[REBOL] Re: Is Rebol OO?
From: greggirwin:mindspring at: 12-Jan-2004 21:42
Hi Behrang,
BS> According to the messages sent to the list I learned
BS> that REBOL is not OO. But it doesn't look to be
BS> procedural or something else too. Isn't it an instance
BS> of a new yet to be named paradigm??
RT calls it a "messaging" language. My favorite definition is that
it's "designed to facilitate the semantic exchange of information
between people and machines."
It's a symbolic language, like Forth; it's a functional language, like
Lisp; it's accessible to mere mortals, like Logo.
You can use it in many ways: imperative, functional, declarative.
I've had a number of "AHA!" moments (many of them thanks to the good
people on this list)in my time with REBOL, as I'm sure you will.
Realizing that "code is data, and data is code" is important. After I
got there, it took a while before someone said "everything is data
until it's evaluated" and another light went on. Other things like
words refer to values; they don't contain them
are important
distinctions too. Learning when to use COPY on series! values, and the
really important "local variable" behavior (someone must have a
boilerplate example on hand for that one :).
The number of "gotcha's" in REBOL is rally low (IMO), but you do have
to keep an open mind sometimes and think about why it works the way it
does. There's nearly always a good reason.
Happy REBOLing!
-- Gregg
