> Hey Ed, that's an excellent summary of how Rebol differs from other mainstream > languages.
Thanks. Hopefully it doesn't rub everyone the wrong way. > I believe the artificial limits placed on Rebol by RT is the problem and agree > that the strategy is wrong. I don't want another platform and Rebol is > doomed to failure if it insists on trying to compete with all the existing > ones. I want Rebol as a tool to bind my existing platforms and applications > together. My hope is that Carl has adhered striclty to his design principles in order to let REBOL complete its formative stages of development. During that period, it would be understandable to put a cork on the bottle, so-to-speak. Once this stage is complete, the vintner would explore ways of making REBOL as socially attractive and applicable as possible. Or so the dream goes... :) > I have given up hope of ever being able to use Rebol this way and was very > disappointed to hear Carl talk about being satisfied with Rebol as an > application like HyperCard. Bleh. So I am consigned to use Rebol for > various utilities where I can - things like A J Martin's C# code generator. I don't recall hearing Carl mention HyperCard. Was that over the mailing list? (I'm familiar with hypercard/supercard and metacard, so I'm interested in the topic.). Personally I don't feel bitter or frustrated by REBOL's status in the world, nor do I feel it is warranted. REBOL is Carl's personal language (the culmination of his experience, his technical/cultural priorities, his design principles and programming needs) and it has been a joy to use it over the years. I wish I could use REBOL more and promote it for commercial projects, but my set of needs are significantly more mainstream than those of its maker. Regards, Ed -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
