[Slightly OT?] Why It's Hard to Explain Rev

[Mark Wieder]

Erin-

Friday, November 4, 2005, 6:16:55 AM, you wrote:

Thanks for the writeup. Nice description.

> (1) When I read on the Rev website that it was unlike Java, C++, or VB,
> my interest in Revolution increased about tenfold--from an ease of use

Interesting. This is the first report I can remember seeing where
someone was drawn to rev because it was UNlike something else.

> (2) My next concern was power and ability; a look at the command and

and maybe 2.5: I find myself some four to five times as productive
writing xtalk as c++ or java. Part of that's getting out of the
code-compile-debug-repeat cycle, part is the near-natural language
syntax, part is the power that's built into the engine, part is the
flexibility.

> this) reminds me of REXX, which I think was a great innovation in

I forgot about REXX (had to take my dusty manual off the shelf). I
usually think of xtalk as being close to Python and Ruby.

> My description of Rev is an RAD tool that lets you construct a GUI as
> easy as with VB, make it functional with normal language code, and work
> with all the files, databases, and I/O devices you'd expect it to. Oh,
> it lets you compile for Windows, MAC, and 'NIX, as well.

...at least in theory. And as they say,

In theory there's no difference between theory and practice, but in
practice there is.

-- 
-Mark Wieder
 mwieder at ahsoftware.net