Lies, damn lies!

[Maneesh Yadav]

I have been on the Rebol mailing list for awhile too...it's really
nice...it would be nice if we could compile it efficiently  (I don't know
what happened to jrm...).  Also I do't like the fact that things like
"find" are hooked to particular search algo's...if rebol could have a nice
graphics API (hooking to OpenGL would be very advantageous), it would be a
truly cool new useful language...

 On Fri, 28 May 1999, Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:

> Billy Tanksley wrote:
> > 
> > The universal Turing machine accepts as its input a description of another
> > Turing machine and a program, remember?  Thus, in order to be universal, a
> > computing system has to be able to read and possibly modify the description
> > of an arbitrary computing system (including itself).
> 
> Sorry - my fault for not knowing the difference between a
> Turing Machine and an Universal Turing Machine. While I was looking
> into that, I came across this interesting paper called "Computation
> Beyond the Turing Limit" which is full of the little greek letters
> that some around here are so fond of. It is about a theory for
> Neural Networks and while I don't think it has any relevance for
> Tunes, I am not a good judge of that. See "In Journals" paper 16 at:
> 
>  
> http://iew3.technion.ac.il:8080/Home/Users/FIFTH.phtml?iehava+Hava+Siegelmann
> 
> > I hate Outlook.
> 
> So?
> 
> > Anyhow, You mentioned that Forth was the only standard universal language by
> > this definition.  In spite of my preference for Forth, I disagree -- Scheme,
> > Lisp, and Python can read arbitrary code in their own language and modify
> > it.  They don't have access to their own source code in the same way a Forth
> > program does, but that's not mentioned in the definition of a universal
> > Turing machine.
> 
> If by "You" you mean Faré then yes, he said that. I didn't understand
> it.
> 
> > Rebol (www.rebol.com) has full Forth-style access to its source, and it's a
> > syntactic language.  I'm very impressed with it.  In fact, I was thinking
> > that it might be tons of fun to write a Lojban module for it.  Check it out
> > and think about it.
> 
> I have been keeping my I on Rebol for about two years and like what I
> have
> seen. While it is a fantastic scripting language, I am not sure you can
> do
> system programming in it.
> 
> -- Jecel
> 
>