[OT] If programming languages were religions...

[Randall Reetz]

Does this mean i am getting old?

-----Original Message-----
From: "Richard Gaskin" <ambassador at fourthworld.com>
To: "How to use Revolution" <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
Sent: 12/22/2008 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] If programming languages were religions...

I've agreed with you before, and I won't change my opinion now:  I still 
agree with you.

My post was merely a response to the one small part of your many posts 
today in which it seemed you had not yet fully grasped the sweeping 
scope of unique enhancements Rev has brought to the xTalk family of 
languages.

It seems you have. I think I'd just lost sight of whatever point this 
thread once had.  My mistake.

May we consider this horse sufficiently pulverized?

My hatchet is buried.  I'm going to go do some Christmas now.
I hope you enjoy yours too.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com


Randall Lee Reetz wrote:

> Richard,
> 
> I just don't think a language is significantly different because it  
> has more or less words than it had at one time.  What distinguishes a  
> language from other languages is structural, grammatical, syntactic.   
> Both spanish and english acquire new lexicon all the time... rarely  
> does this new vocabulary require a rewrite of the grammatical rules  
> that sit at each language's base.  Nobody looking at Rev's script  
> would ever say it wasn't an xtalk language.  Adding a load of new  
> words and functions doesn't change this, never will.  None of what I  
> am saying is an evaluation of Rev.  The reason both SuperCard and Rev  
> can make available hyperCard stack translators is because of this  
> structural kinship.  It is a badge of honor.  Every time a new domain  
> specific version of C comes out, i role my eyes and groan.  You can't  
> make a purse out of a sow's ear.  Garbage in – garbage out.  XTalk  
> heritage is a selling point!  Adding functionality on top... well  
> that is even better.  It matters what sits under and supports any new  
> functionality.
> 
> I am certainly not saying that xTalk is the end-all-be-all language.   
> The future holds promise (I hope).  What I am saying is that a  
> flexible natural language syntax leverages human cognition and  
> learned abilities... enabling a short learning curve and the ability  
> to concentrate on problem domain instead of tool domain.  Allan Kay  
> and Bill Atkinson understood and honored this premise.
> 
> I don't need to be sold on the positive attributes of Rev.  The  
> problems I have had with SuperCard have nothing to do with the  
> product.  I love supercard!  And nothing at all to do with its  
> development team (person).  The organization is too small for decent  
> product development funding.  And, (from what I have been told) the  
> product is owned by a group that does not own access to all of the  
> kernel upon which it is built.
> 
> Randall
> 
> 
> On Dec 22, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> 
>> Randall Lee Reetz wrote:


[truncated by sender]