Hi John,
1. The examples and scripts submitted to REBOL reflect the preferences that
the most active REBOL programmers have acquired over years of imperative
programming.
Unlike other functional or hybrid programming languages, REBOL has rapidly
attracted a surprisingly large following of mainstream programmers and as a
result - no matter to what degree REBOL may encourage functional
programming - these programmers bring their skills to REBOL, albeit
imperative skills.
2. Recall that we have seen a number of users report that as they start
scripting in REBOL, they automatically attempt to think of their program in
terms that they have become used to based on their former programming
experience. These same users also reported that after a short time they
learned to see things the REBOL way, and judging from their messages, they
felt it was a superior way of formulating solutions. Apparently these users
where able identify their initial imperative view and recognized the merit
of functional facilities provided by REBOL.
Here REBOL's hybrid character proves itself useful in allowing the
individual programmer to define the speed at which he is comfortable
migrating from an imperative to a more functional paradigm, if he chooses
to migrate at all.
3. The categorization of a programming language announces the kind of
programming constructs the language supports to its potential future users
and therefore should be based on the facilities it provides - as evidenced
by its syntax and vocabulary.
To describe a hybrid programming language - with a strong bias towards
functional programming - as imperative, based on the choices its current,
most active user base happens to make, is "disingenuous".
Elan
