[REBOL] Re: Is Rebol OO?
From: AJMartin:orcon at: 24-Jan-2004 11:47
> Generally dialects and local uses of parse seem to emerge from some direct
need. Some job grows really repetitious or lengthy. So a dialect can help
simplify the code keep focus to the task at hand.
I agree. I had the need to generate lots of HTML, and I couldn't bear the
thought of writing it by hand, and all the tools still did things in a
brain-dead manner. So I went smarter and created my ML dialect, which I've
described in my earlier post. Then I discovered how to use XML for other
things and extended the use of ML to WML and XML, so allowing me to do more.
Similarly for my C# code. I write several C# classes and noted that for each
class I had to write several support classes! All these classes were
intensely boring to write and it was very easy to make a small mistake or
three and have lots of defects when the programs were compiled. I wrote my
C# classes Rebol dialect to automatically generate these support classes and
even the originating class! So now, I don't get errors when I need to change
a class or it's supporting classes. I just change the dialect code and all
classes are the same in their own way as it were.
> Beyond that is the idea of hidden smarts, where they can embed logic and
contextual behavior hiding the guts from the casual use.
...the realization that it is easier to implement a task-specific language
optimized for that task than it is to implement a general-purpose language
optimized for all possible uses.
Andrew J Martin