[REBOL] Re: Checkbox state is not changing - maybe Allen Kamp updates hi...
From: sanghabum:aol at: 8-Sep-2001 5:28
> Actually, that problem regards NATIVE!s etc. but it surely does
> NOT regard VID etc. You have the full source code of VID, so you
> really KNOW what it does
Well, no, not really. Reading the source of "REBOL/View 22.214.171.124.1
21-Jun-2001" tells me what that version of VID does.
It does not tell me what RT want it to do....
....I may be writing code based on bugs that will be fixed in the next version
....I may be writing code based on features that will be removed in the next
....I may be writing code based on the use of internal features or functions
that are not meant to be exposed and will be hidden or changed in the next
....I may be writing code based on features that aren't complete, and whose
behavior will change in the next version.
These things are all, of course, part of the cutting-edge risk involved in
using something new, so I use Rebol with my eyes open to such possibilities.
Which is precisely why I will not recommend it for "mission critical"
systems. Quick fixes: yes; important stuff with a long lifecycle: no.
I'd be a lot happier with Rebol if all the interfaces and intended
functionality was published. That way.....
....this list would not have long discussions on (say) "tuples and sameness"
that could be solved with a quick look in the documentation.
....we could report bugs confident that they ARE bugs (ie that the code
doesn't do what the docs says—one or the other is wrong)
....we could plan the code we write to avoid (or embrace) features that are
flagged as incomplete or deprecated
....Rebol would not be limited to the relatively few of us who have the time
and patience to learn the language by reading the raw source code.
The opposite end of the spectrum would be Rebol with an ISO standard number
attached. That would give us clarity, but stifle RT/Carl's innovation.
But we are far too far down the other end of the spectrum today, the one that
could easily be interpreted as "Work it all out for yourselves, because we
can't be bothered to tell you; and it'll all change in the next release
The Perl and Python boys must be laughing themselves silly.