Hi Michael,

On Wednesday, April 13, 2005, 1:36:19 PM, you wrote:

>> the  same value. (Almost, there's a detail I'm not going to reveal
>> here, for the sake of simplicity.)

MB> So what's the detail ? :-) You could reveal it in the answer to this post.
MB> :-)

You want to know too much. ;)

I'll give you a hint: position.

(So now you have a puzzle to solve. ;)

MB> Your answer is in some part what I tried to criticize a bit. For the
MB> newcomer to Rebol, RT tries to give the impression it's just a normal
MB> language --- but way more powerful ---- but the there is never a concise
MB> description of what it is supposed to be that is more powerful (execpt
MB> statements like dialecting and such).

I  agree,  we  need more docs. How many times did I write "we need
more docs" in the past years? I guess a LOT. :)

MB> And if Rebol is that much
MB> easier there should be made an attempt at the beginning to explain this to
MB> the people.

Simpler,  not  easier.  It  has  been  suggested  that  "agile" or
"elegant"  may  be  better  words.  It  turns  out,  indeed,  that
"simpler" almost always means more difficult.

MB> So is my model correct in this regard ?

It is. Everything is data, the function body block is data too.

Another example that may clarify it more:

>> b: [bla: []]
== [bla: []]
>> b2: second b
== []
>> insert b2 "hello"
== []
>> b
== [bla: ["hello"]]

This doesn't surprise you, does it?

>> f: func [] [bla: []]
>> b2: second second :f
== []
>> insert b2 "hello"
== []
>> source f
f: func [][bla: ["hello"]]

This  is basically the same as above, so if you are surprised just
stop thinking about it for a second. :)

>> f: func [x] [bla: [] append bla x]
>> f "hello"
== ["hello"]
>> source f
f: func [x][bla: ["hello"] append bla x]

Now,  if  you  are  surprised here, you should realize that we are
doing the same exact thing as above.

BTW, even though I think that we need more docs, the best thing to
learn  something  is  to  discover  it  by  yourself. So trying to
develop  your  own mental model, and proofing it with tests at the
console, is really the best way to understand REBOL.

It's not the easier way though, that's why we need more docs.

Ah,  did  I  say  that we need more docs? (Sorry Gregg for copying
your style. ;)

Regards,
   Gabriele.
-- 
Gabriele Santilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  --  REBOL Programmer
Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila  ---   SOON: http://www.rebol.it/

-- 
To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to 
lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.

Reply via email to