[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Hi Andrew, A J Martin wrote: > rebOldes wrote: > >>YES... I would appreciate it as well.. and #"," character as a word as > > well so I could use it in my dialect. It would be good to send it to the > feedback again. > > And what would you use comma (,) for? For not having this error? >> a: [ eggs, bananas] ** Syntax Error: Invalid word -- eggs, ** Near: (line 1) a: [ eggs, bananas] >> -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
rebOldes wrote: > YES... I would appreciate it as well.. and #"," character as a word as well so I could use it in my dialect. It would be good to send it to the feedback again. And what would you use comma (,) for? Andrew J Martin Speaking in tongues and performing miracles. ICQ: 26227169 http://www.rebol.it/Valley/ http://valley.orcon.net.nz/ http://Valley.150m.com/ -><- -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Gregg Irwin wrote: > > Hi Ged, > > GB> REBOL in a Nutshell would be a great thing to have. > > I agree. Let O'Reilly know. If we *all* let them know we want a great > O'Reilly REBOL book, maybe it'll shake 'em up a little. :) > > -- Gregg Agreed I would love a nutshell book, however I would rather have just one... so I wonder if it would not be prudent for Rebols shell to be a little bit firmer before being cast in stone. -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Hi Ged, GB> REBOL in a Nutshell would be a great thing to have. I agree. Let O'Reilly know. If we *all* let them know we want a great O'Reilly REBOL book, maybe it'll shake 'em up a little. :) -- Gregg -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Hello Martin, Friday, October 31, 2003, 11:11:32 PM, you wrote: AJM> Gregg wrote: >> To me, one of REBOL's greatest strengths is the ability to use words-- AJM> Yes, I agree. I'd like Rebol to be more versatile in this area. I'm sure AJM> with improvements to the current parser in Rebol, then words like: AJM> C# AJM> can become valid Rebol word! values. I'd like it if any combination of AJM> printable characters that aren't all ready another Rebol datatype are AJM> treated as a valid word! value. YES... I would appreciate it as well.. and #"," character as a word as well so I could use it in my dialect. It would be good to send it to the feedback again. -- Best regards, rebOldes -[ http://oldes.multimedia.cz/ ] -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
> Feel free to use the comment section for the article > to critique and > discuss these kinds of ideas. Hopefully there will > be enough interest > to warrant O'Reilly publishing more articles on > REBOL. > > -- Gregg REBOL in a Nutshell would be a great thing to have. Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Andrew et al AJM> I'm sure with improvements to the current parser in Rebol, then AJM> words like: AJM> C# AJM> can become valid Rebol word! values. I'd like it if any combination of AJM> printable characters that aren't all ready another Rebol datatype are AJM> treated as a valid word! value. Feel free to use the comment section for the article to critique and discuss these kinds of ideas. Hopefully there will be enough interest to warrant O'Reilly publishing more articles on REBOL. -- Gregg -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Gregg wrote: > If you look at the options side by side, do you really like the second one better? > > languages: [ > REBOL Java VB Perl Python Ruby Tcl PHP C C++ C-sharp > Delphi Smalltalk Lisp COBOL > ] > > languages: [ > "REBOL" "Java" "VB" "Perl" "Python" "Ruby" "Tcl" "PHP" > "C" "C++" "C#" "Delphi" "Smalltalk" "Lisp" "COBOL" > ] > > Hopefully people will look at the first version and think "Hey, where are those defined? They're not strings...how does it do that?" I think that the third option is better still: languages: [ REBOL Java VB Perl Python Ruby Tcl PHP C C++ C# Delphi Smalltalk Lisp COBOL ] :) Gregg wrote: > To me, one of REBOL's greatest strengths is the ability to use words-- Yes, I agree. I'd like Rebol to be more versatile in this area. I'm sure with improvements to the current parser in Rebol, then words like: C# can become valid Rebol word! values. I'd like it if any combination of printable characters that aren't all ready another Rebol datatype are treated as a valid word! value. Andrew J Martin Speaking in tongues and performing miracles. ICQ: 26227169 http://www.rebol.it/Valley/ http://valley.orcon.net.nz/ http://Valley.150m.com/ -><- -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
Hi Andrew, AJM> I discovered a little problem when I went to "correct" a problem here: >>> languages: [ AJM> [REBOL Java VB Perl Python Ruby Tcl PHP C C++ C# AJM> [Delphi Smalltalk Lisp COBOL AJM> [] AJM> ** Syntax Error: Invalid word -- C# AJM> ** Near: (line 2) REBOL Java VB Perl Python Ruby Tcl PHP C C++ C# AJM> I think it would have been better to use strings instead of words. It also AJM> has the side benefit of reducing the number of words in the script as well. I actually thought long and hard about that, and I opted to both use words, and still include C# in the list. I could easily have left it out, but I actually hope that people will do what you did and find that not everything can be a valid word. I don't want to encourage people to stick with the old mentality of "just make it a string" that you have with most other languages. We can do better with REBOL. If you look at the options side by side, do you really like the second one better? languages: [ REBOL Java VB Perl Python Ruby Tcl PHP C C++ C-sharp Delphi Smalltalk Lisp COBOL ] languages: [ "REBOL" "Java" "VB" "Perl" "Python" "Ruby" "Tcl" "PHP" "C" "C++" "C#" "Delphi" "Smalltalk" "Lisp" "COBOL" ] Hopefully people will look at the first version and think "Hey, where are those defined? They're not strings...how does it do that?" To me, one of REBOL's greatest strengths is the ability to use words-- not to mention all the other native datatypes--and I want to encourage people to be aware of them and how important they are. Thanks for bringing it up! -- Gregg -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
[REBOL] Re: Gregg's Article in OnLamp
On 01-Nov-03, A J Martin wrote: > Sunanda wrote (in another thread): >> ...here's something else I spotted: an article on REBOL by Gregg >> who is > described as "considered somewhat eccentric..." >> >> http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2003/10/30/rebol.html >> >> Nice work, Gregg! > Good work, Gregg! And I third that! A good example of why I like REBOL too. -- Carl Read -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
