[REBOL] Re: Parsing comment
From: greggirwin:mindspring at: 25-Sep-2002 10:39
Just jumping in with a couple thoughts...
<< I'm not sure you're right about people finding REBOL easy to get into
though. As with most things, some people go for them like a duck to water.
But I wouldn't be surprised if a lot give up on REBOL pretty quick due to it
being a little bit
too free-form for their liking. >>
I think programming languages, like so many other things in life, may have
certain features that people feel are good or bad (universally or otherwise
:) but, from a syntactic point of view, people etiher like them or they
don't. Sometimes you spend a lot of time with a language and "get used to"
its syntax. Other times it just clicks in your head and you get it right
off. Some people like modern art; some don't. Some people like Antonio
Gaudi's architecture; some don't. That doesn't mean modern art is bad art or
Gaudi's designs are ugly. Some people like hacking, some like UML and lots
of "process". Neither one is universally better than the other. It depends
on the context.
I've looked at lots of languages and tools over the years. I can't tell you
why the majority of them didn't click with me, but they didn't. REBOL
clicked. I *really wanted* Eiffel, Python, and Ruby to click for me, much
like I wanted Oberon and Frontier to click for me as environments, but it
didn't happen. I can see so much potential in each of them, in different
ways, but they just didn't grab me. I still pull them out periodically, and
I still look for new things, but REBOL grabbed me - big time.
As I drift through my morning fog I think...
Is a cordless circular saw better than a Japanses pull saw? Could you design
a tool with the strengths of both and neither of their weaknesses?
Is pre-fab, or steel frame, construction better than timber-framing? Would
you want to build *every* structure using just one of those methods?
Is English better than Basque?
People can argue the technical merits of tools and languages but, if someone
can use them effectively, you can't discount them out of hand. Beyond the
technical viability of a tool, language, or process, can you disregard the
less scientific
aspects, like culture and craft?
...time for more coffee
--Gregg
