[REBOL] The Industry Needs REBOL But Thinks it Wants Perl
From: princepawn:mailandnews at: 20-Sep-2000 9:08
As I'm sure you all know, if you type rebol as a keyword into any jobsearch
engine you will find no jobs anywhere. The situation with Perl is quite the
opposite. Here at work, I had just finished up a slick REBOL script to do
encrypted ftp file transfers that was 1/4th the size of the legacy Perl
script. My boss was somewhat willing to accept a new language based on my
description of it as easy to maintain, simple, yet powerful. But in the end,
he said drop the REBOL version based on asking some of his friends about REBOL
- and none had heard of it and none were sure that REBOL.com would not be just
another washed up dot-com in another year or so.
So, what I have been working on is a Perl implementation of the REBOL
interpreter so that I can say "I am using the REBOL Perl module" and not tell
them I am using a different language.
In addition, the hidden-source methodology of RT pisses me off. I still cant
run REBOL on my Debian/Linux machine and probably would've been able to had I
been able to compile it myself. A perl implementation would run anywhere Perl
would. And then I could get rid the console-oriented nature of REBOL when I
felt like it.
So what do you think? My guess is that there is far too much uninformed
interest in doing things in Perl and that my Perl inmplementation of
REBOL/Core is the only way to hide the wolf of REBOL in the sheep's clothing
of Perl.
To close, I also am not sure I will ever be able to command the type of pay I
am commanding to do Perl programming and my stack of bills is something REBOL
has not figured out how to reduce.
terrence-brannon: [[princepawn--yahoo--com] perl-refugee myth-gamer]
free-email: http://www.MailAndNews.com
free-usenet: http://www.mailAndNews.com
; all the above is real REBOL code, believe it or not.
