[REBOL] Re: struct vs OO vs language
From: jasonic:panix at: 27-Sep-2001 11:47
Andrew Martin
<[Al--Bri--xtra--co--nz]>
> I've been reworking all my accumulated code and simplifying it all. I
> discovered that it seemed simpler to work with functions rather than Rebol
> objects.
<snip before and after examples>
interesting..this is more like good Forth code, where the real art lies in
factoring out useful words and thus adding to the language not only solving
the problem. The best book on that was the classic 'Thinking Forth' by Leo
Brodie
Paperback 2nd ed edition (1994)
Forth Interest Group; ISBN: 0935533001
The same is true of Postscript, though people dont' really think of it
anylonger as more than a Page description language to be exchanged between
design software and output devices. The NeXT [c.1990] computer used Display
Postscript for all the GUI in the begining. That put some heavy demands on
processor speed and RAM, but it was a good idea. An extended Rebol could
presumably be used for an entire GUI environment.
Anyone know if Forth plays a conscious role in Rebol's development ?
- Jason
