Mike Henley wrote:
[snippage]
Rebol itself seemed a very easy to read language. Sorta like ho
readable SQL is. I might even say more readable than python or ruby,
or at least as readable.I have the intention to learn it over the coming few days, at least to
customize vanilla to my needs.So i ask you guys, what’s wrong with Rebol? i mean other than it’s
proprietary nature. 'cos anyway, there are many commercial IDEs for
open source languages, and if smitten enough i might even consider a
rebol SDK. It just amazes me for how readable it is, how much it seems
to enable to do with so little code, and the size and capability of
the final solution.What’s wrong with Rebol?
Perhaps nothing is wrong with it.
From what I’ve seen of Rebol, it reminds me of a language that is
nothing but function calls. And it has a very rich, very smart set
of built-in functions with interfaces that are consistent with each
other and fairly intuitive.
My only negative comments would be:
- Sometimes it’s a little “too” high-level for my taste, or high-level
in the “wrong way”: Currency data type, for example. Doesn’t it have
that? It just feels wrong to me somehow, but that could be a silly
prejudice on my part. - As you said, it’s proprietary.
- It’s not OOP by any stretch of the imagination. After spending 13
years learning to think OO-ly, a strict procedural language feels like
a step backwards. This feeling is probably enhanced by the name, which
reminds me of COBOL or ALGOL.
Having said all that, I can see where Rebol might be really useful in
many circumstances such as quick scripts for web scraping. Though I’d
miss Ruby’s regular expressions. Does Rebol have those?
Just my $0.01,
Hal