[REBOL] Re: Parsing comment
From: joel:neely:fedex at: 26-Sep-2002 13:14
Hi, Gregg, et al,
Yet another variation, just for fun, and a profound philosophical
Gregg Irwin wrote:
> Hi Dick,
> Hopefully I won't just add more confusion here...
> << 10 + 10
> means something to the Rebol interpretation process, but
> 10+10 does not have the same meaning...
> If we take the numbers out of the equation :) to avoid
> syntactical issues, you can do this (because + is a valid
> character in words):
> >> a: 1
> == 1
> >> b: 2
> == 2
> >> a + b
> == 3
> >> a+b: 4
> == 4
> >> a+b
> == 4
> So, "a+b" is not the same as "a + b". Now, you could also
> change the operation of +, like this:
> >> set '+ :*
> >> 1 + 3
> == 3
> But, AFAIK, you can't alter the operands that an operator
> operates upon. :)
Depends on your definition of "alter"...
>> a: func [:op 'val] [set val do [op get val get val]]
>> b: 3
>> a + b
A long time ago I heard someone say "FORTH is not a programming
language; it is a programming language construction kit!"
Despite differences in notation and internal representation, the
REBOL facility for dailecting, and the absence of distinction
between "data" and "code" make me think that the same statement
could be made of REBOL.
Of course, I remember the saying,
I've only met one self-made man, and he should have sued
the manufacturer for malpractice!