1. Re: John Brown & Im A Damn Poor Kid...
>I would argue that when a program is bound using BIND to create a .EXE
>file anyone who received the prog would assume it was an 'executable';
>it doesn't need any other external files to run nor the interpretor (
>it's all bundled into the .EXE ).
>
>Would we say a Java Applet is an executable ? All depends on how one
>looks at it. I don't want to start a flame war on what is or isn't a
>true executable or we'll be arguing over whether 80x86 code is
>interpreted by microcode etc etc.
>
>I don't think that The Poor Kid realised that he didn't need to create a
>.EXE file and could do it all with .BAT files; I too made the same
>mistake when v2.1 was first announced without BIND thrown in - And I,
>allegedly, know what I'm doing as a prof. programmer !
********************************
All very nice points, I'm sure.
However, whether you agree that it isn't or is compiling, or doing something
akin to compiling, or whether he understood at the time of the message is no
longer relevant (in my opinion).
My point may be reiterated as being that
1) By now he understands very well what he has
2) He has no real reason to complain. He is not being denied the essential
functionality of Euphoria.
Thanks for your response.
Cheers!
--Warren
