1. RE: ESL
> Subject: Re: ESL
>
>
> posted by: D. Newhall <derek_newhall at yahoo.com>
>
> CChris wrote:
> >
> > Is anyone (still) interested in a standard euphoria library?
> >
> > D. Newhall: are you still manageing this project?
> >
> > Is anyone using esl0.01 by J. Peterson or the Simple
> library by Aku? Or not
> >
> > using them because they aren't that useful? Feedback on
> these topics could
> > be useful so as to assess the future of that project, and
> of the code
> > I provided it with.
> >
> > CChris
>
> Ummm... I guess...
>
> Around January I moved, started a new semester of school,
> changed majors, had my girlfriend break up with me, and
> worked 2 - 3 jobs so I was much to busy to do ANYTHING. Once
> I had free time to focus on something outside the necessary
> stuff I need to do (probably around 4 months later) the only
> ESL messages in my inbox were from March.
>
> I still think the ESL would be a great idea and I've thought
> about "restarting" it (assuming it ever stopped). I was at
> least going to fix up all the code I'd done for it (quite a
> bit actually) and release it but got sidetracked I guess..
>
>
That's ok.
You probably realise that I have output a fair amount of code for the
project, available at oedoc.free.fr/Fichiers/ESL/
Quite obviously, I'm interested to know if it is going to be included for
the most part
(with due modifications and amendments) or not. I am really thinking that I
might spin off some
sort of project, with a certainly less minimalistic standpoint. I'd
consider naming that project DEEP (Definitely Easier Euphoria Programming).
I won't decide upon launching this until I have some vision of where the ESL
is going, as I
would split away from that project or not according to what I see. I have
other interests, so I am not in a hurry to take any decision.
CChris
2. RE: ESL
> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:44:01 +0100
> From: Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: ESL
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 09:33:09 +1000, Craig Welch <euphoria at cwelch.org>
> wrote:
>
> >CChris wrote:
> >
> >> Is anyone using esl0.01 by J. Peterson or the Simple
> library by Aku?
>
> Um, no. I was put off by the bickering. I have just updated my (yet
> another) upper/lower that I'd be willing to submit, but not if I have
> to start arguing the toss over it.
>
> Bottom line is I would be interested in a /stern/ dictatorship of
> "code this" ("or that or that") followed by a no-nonsense "well, that
> beats everything else submitted hands down, so shut the * up".
> Somewhere between complete tyrant and some consideration of public
> opinion, but no further - a firm hand is needed.
>
> I think it would be good to have a 'wiki'-style list of routines
> people want and some kind of poll for what is most needed..
>
> Plus, no "debate" over best api; best solution wins, end of story.
> (admittedly I would need a pretty good definition of "best", beit
> speed, code clarity, size, or whatever (for me in that order), before
> I became one of the "faithful".)
>
> Regards,
> Pete
> PS actually, I could probably bite that bullet myself... My face can
> stand clogging, as they say. Maybe next month 
)
>
From what I recall, the bickering was about which modules should be
released, which routines
they should include or exclude, and how the source code had to be
documented. I can't remember
that there was any bickering on choosing concurrent code for some
functionality, as there were
not many coders and they had complementary modules in mind.
If you think all the above should be issued by some enlightened dictator,
aka project coordinator, well ...
I'd say its a doule edged sword. On one hand it guarantees the consistency
of the project and
probably the fact that some code is actually released. On the other hand, it
guarantees
the emergence of various strong views of what a standard should be,
resulting in as many
standards as there will be people able to code something of meaningful
importance.
I think the net result of the firm hand policy will just beat the very
purpose of a standard code bank.
CChris
3. RE: ESL
- Posted by Jeremy Peterson <ptl99 at hotmail.com>
Aug 29, 2006
-
Last edited Aug 30, 2006
What would you suggest then?
I think having someone who's in charge and ultimately makes all the
decisions(even though the others of course have input) will be the only way this
project is ever useful.
Look at Win32Lib-WxEuphoria-etc. Most successful libraries are started and
programmed mainly by one person, although others contribute.
Jeremy
4. RE: ESL
> Subject: RE: ESL
>
>
> posted by: Jeremy Peterson <ptl99 at hotmail.com>
>
> What would you suggest then?
> I think having someone who's in charge and ultimately makes
> all the decisions(even though the others of course have
> input) will be the only way this project is ever useful.
>
> Look at Win32Lib-WxEuphoria-etc. Most successful libraries
> are started and programmed mainly by one person, although
> others contribute.
>
> Jeremy
>
I completely agree that, at least in this community, one head project are
the only ones to succeed. One head doesn't mean there's not a plurality of
coders.
As I said, look at the various GUI libs around - wxEuphoria, win32lib,
winClass, Euwingui, [wx]motor, add to the list. win32lib is less and less of
a standard, and perhaps the only thing that can be done is a half
comprehensive module collection, which will be standard just like wxEuphoria
or winClass are.
As someone remarked months ago, for example, the genfunc.e package by R.
Forno can be thought as an ESL already done, and why make another one?
So, you are mostly right, and this implies that a standard Eu library akin
to say the STL for C++ is not going to happen, because the proper
coordinated development framework needed just isn't there. Unless RDS
endorses one of the existing libs, like it does for win32lib.
CChris
