[REBOL] Re: facts we will have to face ...
From: media:quazart at: 24-Oct-2001 11:29
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Fitzgerald" <[matt--fitzgerald--bigpond--com]>
To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:01 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: facts we will have to face ...
> I agree to some extent, but should we really restrict the functionality of
> any language? A language has to be expressive and the more you can
express
> and the way you express it, the more elegant it is. It's like the English
> language, the vocabulary is large but how much do we really use? Not
much,
> but the extra words (or functionality if you like) still exist for those
> that DO wish to use them.
yep and try to express any physical theory without using mathematical
terms... funny... a whole book of english explaning translates into one
mathematical expression ...
Some languages ARE meant for some things. REBOL allows you to change
dialects... so you canadapt your code (expression) to the situation... How
can it become more expressive !?
The language itself isn't restrictive. the limits were set because of an
exact goal... portability. If Rebol were 38 MB to install and relied on 345
other software extensions and then was only supported on 2 platforms... I
would not be using REBOL... period.
Yes, a little more in the terms of raw Multimedia would be nice but not in
the way of additional formats ... more like in additional mediums. I'd also
like a little more polish in draw (like anti-alising) and some other effects
(like alpha channel) but that's normal. Give me those and I'll want
something more.
I'd also like an API but then just use /pro with shared libs and that's
exactly what you've got.
-Maxim
