Larry Wall's REBOL opinion
[1/9] from: carlos::lorenz::gmail::com at: 22-Nov-2005 10:43
Hi list
This morning while googling some REBOL I just came across this funny link:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.amiga.programmer/browse_thread/thread/95f20db8b658f8fd/407d48901e9cac7f?lnk=st&q=REBOL&rnum=4&hl=pt-BR#407d48901e9cac7f
--
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:
Carlos Lorenz
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:
[2/9] from: SunandaDH::aol::com at: 22-Nov-2005 9:38
Carlos:
> This morning while googling some REBOL I just came across this funny link:
It's very old: 1998.
REBOL has continuations
dates it back to version 1. REBOL got completely
rewritten after that, and continuations were discontinued.
It'd be interesting to know Larry Wall's take on REBOL as it is today; just
as it would to know Carl's take on the latest PERL.
Sunanda.
[3/9] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 22-Nov-2005 7:14
* SunandaDH-aol.com <SunandaDH-aol.com> [051122 05:47]:
> Carlos:
> > This morning while googling some REBOL I just came across this funny link:
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> It'd be interesting to know Larry Wall's take on REBOL as it is today; just
> as it would to know Carl's take on the latest PERL.
The co-owner of my company is a perlmonger, and it behooves me to
learn a little perl, in case he becomes incompacitated or I have
to use rebol to generate perl code (working on that now).
I'm aware that perl 6.0 is meant to be a major revision and
has been "pending" for a long time. It will be interesting
to follow how backward compatible it is to v5.8.0.
Major revisions can be headaches, methinks.
tim
> Sunanda.
> --
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[4/9] from: SunandaDH:aol at: 22-Nov-2005 11:45
Tim:
> Major revisions can be headaches, methinks.
Larry Wall uses an even stronger term: for PERL, it's the apocalypse.
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html
But minor revisions can be headaches too....
....REBOL.org, which runs purely on REBOL/Core, is a version or two behind
current /Core releases. Why? Minor incompatibilities that we haven't yet tracked
down across 120+ scripts would break too many things....
.... And it's starting to matter as it is not always possible to even load
the headers of scripts written for later versions. Example:
http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=gismo.r&coloryes
The script is not rendered in color as it crashes our attempts to parse it
with the version of Core we run.
Backwards and forwards compatibility should be goals of any language intended
to support applications with a life time measuring more than a few months.
Sunanda.
[5/9] from: tim-johnsons::web::com at: 22-Nov-2005 9:33
* SunandaDH-aol.com <SunandaDH-aol.com> [051122 07:43]:
> Tim:
>
> > Major revisions can be headaches, methinks.
>
> Larry Wall uses an even stronger term: for PERL, it's the apocalypse.
>
> http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html
Apocalypse huh? Perl 6.0 has been in the can so long, I sometimes
wonder if it is "apocryphal" <wink>
> But minor revisions can be headaches too....
Tell me about it!
cniweb is a very rebol friendly hoster, and hosts a number of
different rebol users. We had a panic attack in March of 2003 when the
hoster upgraded rebol and scripts were breaking *everywhere*
But as soon as he restored the original, all was good and he hasn't
dared to do an upgrade since.....
Sorry, - I can't remember what was breaking...
But a pre-2003 binary lives on the machines hosting the virtual
domains for that hoster.
tim
> ....REBOL.org, which runs purely on REBOL/Core, is a version or two behind
> current /Core releases. Why? Minor incompatibilities that we haven't yet tracked
<<quoted lines omitted: 11>>
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[6/9] from: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 26-Nov-2005 13:59
Hello Carlos,
Tuesday, November 22, 2005, 1:43:15 PM, you wrote:
CL> Hi list
CL> This morning while googling some REBOL I just came across this funny link:
CL> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.amiga.programmer/browse_thread/thread/95f20db8b658f8fd/407d48901e9cac7f?lnk=st&q=REBOL&rnum=4&hl=pt-BR#407d48901e9cac7f
CL> --
CL> *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:
CL> Carlos Lorenz
CL> *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:
Interesting reading from past, but I must say I hate these "language
wars". I'm using Rebol every day and I'm happy. I have no job for Perl
to do. Perl maybe has the regular expressions but I really don't know
how I would use them to parse so many pages to get data as I do now
every day.
--
Best regards,
rebOldes -----------------[ http://box.lebeda.ws/~hmm/ ]
[7/9] from: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 26-Nov-2005 14:14
Hello SunandaDH,
Tuesday, November 22, 2005, 5:45:14 PM, you wrote:
Sac> Tim:
>> Major revisions can be headaches, methinks.
Sac> Larry Wall uses an even stronger term: for PERL, it's the apocalypse.
Sac> http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html
Sac> But minor revisions can be headaches too....
Sac> ....REBOL.org, which runs purely on REBOL/Core, is a version or two behind
Sac> current /Core releases. Why? Minor incompatibilities that we haven't yet tracked
Sac> down across 120+ scripts would break too many things....
Sac> .... And it's starting to matter as it is not always possible to even load
Sac> the headers of scripts written for later versions. Example:
Sac> http://www.rebol.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/rebol/view-script.r?script=gismo.r&colorSac>
yes
Sac> The script is not rendered in color as it crashes our attempts to parse it
Sac> with the version of Core we run.
It's because the Core is not able to load/next/header ? Post it to
Rambo, it's a bug. Core should be able to load/next/header.
By the way, why you don't use View to make the job? And why you are
using CGI for such a thing? You should make the page when you upload
the script and than use just a html files.
Sac> Backwards and forwards compatibility should be goals of any language intended
Sac> to support applications with a life time measuring more than a few months.
Sac> Sunanda.
--
Best regards,
rebOldes -----------------[ http://oldes.multimedia.cz/ ]
[8/9] from: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 26-Nov-2005 14:35
Hello Tim,
Tuesday, November 22, 2005, 7:33:16 PM, you wrote:
TJ> * SunandaDH-aol.com <SunandaDH-aol.com> [051122 07:43]:
>>
>> Tim:
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>>
>> http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html
TJ> Apocalypse huh? Perl 6.0 has been in the can so long, I sometimes
TJ> wonder if it is "apocryphal" <wink>
>> But minor revisions can be headaches too....
TJ> Tell me about it!
TJ> cniweb is a very rebol friendly hoster, and hosts a number of
TJ> different rebol users. We had a panic attack in March of 2003 when the
TJ> hoster upgraded rebol and scripts were breaking *everywhere*
TJ> But as soon as he restored the original, all was good and he hasn't
TJ> dared to do an upgrade since.....
TJ> Sorry, - I can't remember what was breaking...
TJ> But a pre-2003 binary lives on the machines hosting the virtual
TJ> domains for that hoster.
TJ> tim
>> ....REBOL.org, which runs purely on REBOL/Core, is a version or two behind
>> current /Core releases. Why? Minor incompatibilities that we haven't yet tracked
>> down across 120+ scripts would break too many things....
>>
And one more comment - problems with incompatibities has all
languages. Even running old PHP code on the latest PHP is not without
problems.
Some of my older Rebol script do not work with the latest Rebol, but
that's OK as they are old and I don't need them. If I would need them
it would not be such a problem to fix it and I still have all the
old Rebol version so I can run the script from the correct interpret.
That's the biggest advantage that Rebol is so compact:)
--
Best regards,
rebOldes -----------------[ http://oldes.multimedia.cz/ ]
[9/9] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 26-Nov-2005 22:00
On Saturday, 26-Novenber-2005 at 14:35:05 rebOldes wrote,
>And one more comment - problems with incompatibities has all
>languages. Even running old PHP code on the latest PHP is not without
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>old Rebol version so I can run the script from the correct interpret.
>That's the biggest advantage that Rebol is so compact:)
What's the story with the REBOL plugin? Once a script is written for a particular version
of the plugin, it'll always use that version, won't it? Unless RT tweaks the version,
I guess...
-- Carl Read.
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted