Re:REBOL in One Line
by mhd on Friday May 22, 2015 @05:38AM
(#9587309)
That's an interesting example, as the name of Ruby (as well as its purpose and syntax) evoked memories of Perl when it first became well-known enough. And even back in those days, that wasn't necessarily a good thing.
REBOL had some things going for it: Small executable, interesting syntax, data types and features and the pedigree of its developer.
On the other hand, it was a proprietary contender in a field with a plethora of open source contributors, and where developers actually cared about this.
And with that comes a lack of community and packages. Not sure if REBOL even has a package system/repository, which is quite important, no matter how good your standard library is (one of the things that, well, mortally wounded Tcl).
REBOL had some things going for it: Small executable, interesting syntax, data types and features and the pedigree of its developer.
On the other hand, it was a proprietary contender in a field with a plethora of open source contributors, and where developers actually cared about this.
And with that comes a lack of community and packages. Not sure if REBOL even has a package system/repository, which is quite important, no matter how good your standard library is (one of the things that, well, mortally wounded Tcl).