Gabriele said:
I, Elan and Brian had a long discussion about "scoping".
I could summarize that for you, so we can discuss it.
I was going to dig through the archives, but then,
wwink2 said:
I would also appreciate seeing this.
So maybe a summary might be a good idea. If someone from REBOL
could summarize, it would be even better!
Russell said:
...practically every Rebol statement returns a value that
can be an argument...
That's a good point. A lot of languages have a notion of
statements that don't return a value and expressions that do,
and never the twain shall meet. You can't use a statement
as an argument, and, since expressions don't cause side effects,
you wouldn't use them as statements.
REBOL, for the most part, doesn't distinguish between statements
and expressions by making most things that would be statements
return a value. So it really is an EXPRESSION language.
I was complaining to Jeff that it is more `procedural' than
`functional', though. If you take a look at the scripts that
people write, and in particular the `functions' that they write,
you will notice that the large majority of them work by
modifying either their arguments or some global state variables
(a `procedural' style).
Very few of them are written to solely return a new value based
on their arguments ('functional' style).
I think this is because the selection of natives in REBOL is
heavily biased towards `procedural' programming. You *can*
write in a `functional' style in REBOL, but if you use a
`procedural' style, you don't have to write as much code because
there are so many more natives to choose from.
John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`What's the difference between a feature and a bug?'
`Features are documented.'
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
