Maarten also said: >You can make a continuation based mechanism in REBOL, especially with all the >reflexive features you have available. This is of course not an interpreter >internal (what the discussion above is), but a mini interpreter implemented >on top of a very good interpreter model such as Scheme of REBOL offers.
Interesting. The thought of implementing other languages, building on top of REBOL (much the way Microsoft is building its new ".Net" family of languages on top of its new "Common Language Runtime"). We could call them ".REB" imagine, then, this very realistic (-_o) conversation, between two people shipwrecked on a island, a young nubile lass, and a dashing REBOL developer. Although they have replaced their computer's power supply with solar panels, they are too far away from any wireless internet connection. Like so many young nubile lasses, she is a functional programmer. She is despairing because she cannot download a Scheme interpreter. She cries out. YNL: "Oh! such disappointment! Here I am, a young nubile lass with a zip disk of Scheme source code, and not an interpreter in sight!" DRD: "No fear, miss," says the dashing REBOL developer, pulling out a floppy disk "behold!" YNL: "What is it? Where did you get it?" DRD: "It's a full implementation of Scheme.REB! I helped develop it!" YNL: "My hero!" ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 9:50 AM Subject: [REBOL] Re: About CONTINUATIONS > Maybe opening up the abandoned REBOL 1.x tree would allow those interested to fully explore the benefits and pitfalls of the continuation model? Perhaps it might be easier to develop a REBOL compiler from the knowledge and sources available for Scheme / Lisp / ML compilers via this route / source tree? > > I just wish it wasn't so difficult to explore these issues in REBOL. > > cheers, > > Mark Dickson -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
