[REBOL] Re: Sameness - an abstract approach.
From: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 14-Feb-2003 13:15
Hi Gabriele,
...
> (If I was going to
> implement a REBOL interpreter, I would do it so that any two "1"s
> would actually be different data structures in different memory
> locations --- even if they are equal in content and so totally
> interchangeable; this does not mean that REBOL has to be this way,
> but it means that this is a possible way.)
>
> Regards,
> Gabriele.
You already may have noticed, that the difference between our POV's is mainly a terminological
problem. You think, that an integer is what you implement it to be, while the most useful
terminology uses abstractions to hide some implementation details. A terminology using
implementation details is always more complicated, while its stability is questionable
- if you changed the implementation, you would have to use a different terminology even
if the implementations were compatible.
Rebol documentation uses abstractions instead of implementation details. I am aware of
one implementation detail in the documentation: "... For example, a TRUE would be returned
if two strings ... (occupy the same location in memory)." I intentionally omitted the
... parts, that can be called a "definition in circle". This definition is so much incomplete,
that it isn't a definition. That is why I thought, that Rebol deserved a more useful
definition.
Regards
-L
