[REBOL] Re: long read, sorry...
From: maximo:meteorstudios at: 6-Nov-2003 10:17
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashley Trüter [mailto:[atruter--labyrinth--net--au]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:31 PM
> To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: long read, sorry...
> Hi Max,
> I can see where you are coming from. One of the problems with
> email as a
> forum for discussion is that too much becomes noise and too
> little can be
> mistaken for apathy.
> The REBOL community, such as it is, probably has a more
> diverse background
> than other technical communities, with some areas of note being:
> This diversity is a *good* thing IMHO
depends on the perspective. it is good since it proves rebol is flexible and is able
to tackle many things. Yet, it is less good cause there is less concerted effort. It
also makes improving rebol harder. Cause there more to cover than many other code bases.
> In my case, running a software company that uses REBOL on Windows
>I'd love to respond to
> / participate in more of the discussions but time is a big
> factor for me.
I also participate less than I use to, since I have less free time at work, and am forced
to use REBOL less and less WRT python... :-(
> The reason I have this preference to roll my own is that I want to
> understand / control as much of the problem domain as
And that is why rebol is so addictive to all the more advanced programmers. When you
"get" it, then everything seems simple/possible.
> (with non-RT code I find myself thinking of it as "external"
> and wanting to verify / understand its implementation). I suppose REBOL
> has spoiled me
This might also be because you are forced to do so in many circumstances...
we are all genious in our own little world, but have a hard time making our things work
> I would hazard a guess that most folks who spend some time
> with VID have
> some sort of GUI library script with various pre-defined
> styles and / or
> functions that they use. Is it a bad thing that we don't all
> use a common
> community defined GUI library? No.
and I agree, but it is also because there is no massively supported extended alternative.
If you had an engine which did this and went far beyond... in an easy as VID dialect...
I am tempted to say that you might look into it and if it was stable and complete, you'd
be happy to use it, at least occasionaly..
This is a specific example, but other areas of rebol are still sprawled and segmented.
Many have ideas, many have tidbits, for the more average developper or rebol novice,
this quickly becomes a liability.
Having to learn a language and then having to redo what is standard in your previous
app (like python users and regexp) is a tedious process which discourages many people,
even seasoned rebolers. When you want to bring someone in your turf, you need to have
a bridge that is solid, shiny and lighted, so that its not scary to cross. This rebol
provides by iteslf, because of its super language and underlying concepts.
the problem, is that once your on the other side, most if not all miss home, because
houses have windows without shutters, streets with no signs, (althtough they are straight
and in good condition, with very few patches), etc...
many don't have the time, patience, knowledge, reference, or even skills to reprogram
some core functionality which is basic in all the other languages which rebols tries
to upturn... I know you'll say, yeah but we have something of our own, we have something
better, we have, we have... but in the perspective of any new user, we miss, we miss,
we miss, we miss... and in some regions, its hard to explain why.
I also know I love rebol cause I LOVE to program my own core stuff. I am very specific
with what I like and don't, and often, I find other people do sloppy stuff (not specifically
talking about rebol stuff here, which is well above average IMHO).
> Steel looks quite innovative and I like the fact that it is
> built directly
> on View.
(that would be glass... I know... its hard to keep track ;-)
>If and when RT releases VID 1.3 I'll put the time in
> to look at
> what each offers me and where I'm best off putting my limited
> R&D time.
> Will I contribute to steel discussion / development? If I end
> up using it,
> you bet!
This kind of argument is true, and I admit that it is true for me too.
When I set off to do steel, I knew I'd have a hard time convincing ppl. Not because
they are dumb... but because they are RIGHT. Things have to be usable for anyonw to
use them, of course.
Which is why I keep the grip tight on the ship's helm and move on, expecting the day
I'll arrive at port.