Brett,
Thanks for the insight; I think it is especially helpful
to note:
> One has you thinking like "I have this little box with a value in it.
Now I must
> remember the various allowable ways to get my value in and out of the
box".
> The other way leads to thinking like "I will refer to this thing here
using
> the name x. So now, let's intrepret x as a email".
With respect to
> So now, I don't tend to think of global variables as just that.
Instead I
> know I can create symbols in a global context, and I can also set
symbols in
> a specific context. And I can write Rebol descriptions that will work
on
> both depending on context!
can you perhaps construct the simplest example that illustrates
your point ?
Thanks -
Mike Mastroianni
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 10:58 PM
Subject: [REBOL] REBOL's scoping rules Re:
> Judging by previous message on the list, this question will bring a
variety
> of responses!
>
> Re "global variables".
> Coming from a compiled-language background, it was hard for me to
learn
> about the immediate nature of the message I send to Rebol. More
important, I
> had to get out of my old ideas of thinking of variables and instead
treat
> words as symbolising something else. A subtle but profound difference.
One
> has you thinking like "I have this little box with a value in it. Now
I must
> remember the various allowable ways to get my value in and out of the
box".
> The other way leads to thinking like "I will refer to this thing here
using
> the name x. So now, let's intrepret x as a email".
>
> This relates directly to context-sensitivity. The words-as-symbols
idea
> means that you can have a description of something that will take on
> different values in different contexts. For example, applying a
function to
> different rebol objects. If you are from an OOP school you may be of
the
> opinion that this should be done through an object interface - but I
believe
> that this an actually an paradigm that Rebol allows for, without
mandating.
> It comes down to how you want to describe it.
>
> A benefit of this approach is that it is providing a lower barrier of
entry
> for non-programmers. That is, when starting out with Rebol a person
may not
> even think of such things as scope and contexts (way too abstract) -
they
> are perhaps, in their mind, using one context, perhaps like in a
simple
> conversation with someone else.
>
> So now, I don't tend to think of global variables as just that.
Instead I
> know I can create symbols in a global context, and I can also set
symbols in
> a specific context. And I can write Rebol descriptions that will work
on
> both depending on context!
>
> Brett.
<SNIP>
