Transcript and Dot Notation

[Peter T. Evensen]

At 03:14 PM 2/24/2006, you wrote:
>I've said it before and will say it again:  If true OO is what you really
>want, why not just use one of the bazillion OO languages?  Once Lingo went
>down that route, it ceased to be a learnable language for ordinary humans.

I think there are two issues here, or two competing goals:  make Rev a tool 
for the masses (Dan's "Inventive User") and make Rev a more powerful 
development tool (for the programmer/professional).

As a professional developer, I would welcome more object-oriented 
facilities in Rev, but that can come at the price of making Rev less simple 
(but it doesn't have to).

My goal is to get things done quickly and easily.  Revolution allows me to 
do that now.  Adding OOP would probably make me more productive.

I could use one of the bazillion OO language, but I would not as productive 
because I have to spend more time coding the things the Rev engine does for 
me.  Some of my solutions, however, might be cleaner and more elegant 
because of the object-oriented nature of the program.  I could more closely 
tie code and data together into objects and not have to worry about 
unintended interactions.

It seems that Rev is walking a fine line in trying to address these two 
markets.  I think they are doing a good job.

Peter T. Evensen
http://www.PetersRoadToHealth.com
314-629-5248 or 888-628-4588