From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@...>
Date: 2003-09-03T06:13:28+09:00
Subject: Re: what's wrong with REBOL?

After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) belched out...:
> I first came across rebol a while ago; it seemed interesting but then
> i was put off by its proprietary nature, although the core of the
> language is a free download.
... much omitted ...
> What's wrong with Rebol?

"What's wrong" is that 'proprietary nature.'  If I write code in Perl,
Python, or Ruby, I can be certain that I won't get bitten because of
someone pulling the rug out from under them.  

I can't be certain in the same way of the perpetual availability of
REBOL.

Furthermore, if I am considering whether to build and contribute a
module to REBOL (where the user base is necessarily limited) or to
Perl/Python/Ruby, I'd be more inclined to do the latter.  And so there
are LOTS of third party libraries for these other languages.
-- 
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.enworbbc" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://cbbrowne.com/info/linuxdistributions.html
Rules of  the Evil  Overlord #102.  "I will not  waste time  making my
enemy's death look  like an accident -- I'm  not accountable to anyone
and my other enemies wouldn't believe it.