1. Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

Judging by the content of the forum, it would seem that as of today Phix is much more used than OE. But is this really the case? If so, could we regard Phix as the de facto 'flagship' version/variant of Euphoria? (I know, Phix is different from Eu, but still...) This is not just an academic question, I believe, because a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

I hope this is not going to hurt anyone's feelings, but the overall impression one gets is that the usage trend of OE is going downwards. I honestly would be happy if someone disproved this. Phix, of course, is on an upwards trend and its future looks brighter than OE's. It is also being much more actively developed (and more thoroughly documented too, in terms of code examples - Pete's wealth of code examples at Rosetta Code, more than 1200 tasks completed, virtually all of the required tasks, is impressive!).

Could you please share your thoughts about the points I mentioned above?

Feel free to disagree with me, but please nicely.

-GreenEuphorian

new topic     » topic index » view message » categorize

2. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

I have been with this community since almost day one. I think my first version of Euphoria was 1.2. I still had the floppy disks until a few months ago, but I made sure to take pics of them before I tossed 'em. smile (I moved several states away and to a smaller residence, so I tried to downsize as much as possible... even trinkets and floppy disks.)

I have loved being here and appreciate the huge amounts of unpaid effort that has gone into both Euphoria and Phix.

With that said...

GreenEuphorian said...

...a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

That's a tough one. I'm not sure how much Euphoria development is going on, but it's most likely being done, if at all, by Greg and Shawn. Greg does have an MVC project he's developing, and I suspect Euphoria will benefit from that. But as to which one a new person should use?

For hobbyist programming, playing with them both and deciding is probably the best path. However, Pete continues to develop Phix, and it's a great language to learn and use. n00bs can benefit from its ease-of-use, and advanced programmers can dig into more advanced concepts and paradigms. Now that there seems to be some Linux movement with Phix, that makes it even that much better.

I turned to Phix when I needed threads. (Turned out, there was a different (probably better) paradigm to pursue, but I didn't learn that till later. Regardless, I found my work with Phix to be useful and beneficial. And Pete is a very accommodating and capable programmer.)

There are some things that Phix does that I haven't yet fully grasped, but that's just a matter of time and learning. And Pete doesn't like namespaces (although, with the latest Class effort, maybe he's changing his mind), whereas I use them all the time. I'll give each namespace a new() (myLib:new()) if I want to, but Pete insists on a prefix (myLib_new()). However, Phix accommodates both tactics, so I'm not sure why I mentioned it, except to poke Pete about it. grin

GreenEuphorian said...

...the overall impression one gets is that the usage trend of OE is going downwards... Phix, of course, is on an upwards trend and its future looks brighter than OE's.

Neither language is used by that many people, so that shouldn't even be a factor.

And the downward usage trend has been the case for a long while. I don't expect either language is growing from outside the community. If anything, people using Euphoria are switching to Phix because of its activity here (or using both when appropriate). I suspect the overall Eu/Phix community is shrinking, and the remaining population is shifting between the two or migrating to Phix. (I have absolutely no idea about numbers. I'm just assuming and guessing. The guys who run the web sites will know more about traffic.)

GreenEuphorian said...

[Phix] is also being much more actively developed (and more thoroughly documented too, in terms of code examples - Pete's wealth of code examples at Rosetta Code, more than 1200 tasks completed, virtually all of the required tasks, is impressive!).

I think this is true (and definitely impressive, especially for a one man show!). Despite Greg's (and Shawn's?) excellent contributions and efforts, Euphoria is probably not going to see another version, and I'm not sure it can be competitive again in today's marketplace. I'm not sure what Euphoria's market is anymore.

Will Phix reach a version 1.0? I think Pete said that was going to happen soon... And I wouldn't be surprised to see Phix still being actively developed in a year or two. It all depends on where Pete wants to take it. What niche does he want to target? It would be interesting to see if Pete has a multi-year plan or if he's just taking it day by day.

The bright spots I see for Euphoria/Phix is Euphoria-MVC and Phix+GTK. But will more than 10 people use either? Again, that's something the makers can answer better than I.

I built a business with tools I developed using Euphoria, and I'll always be grateful for Rob Craig's (and then the community's) baby. It was awesome for my needs for several decades. But I'm migrating to other languages simply because there are other modern tools with great (e.g., superior) development environments that make RAD real.

For example, if Microsoft gives us the MAUI they prophesy, it's going to be hard to beat. That's a big if, but a huge reward if they accomplish what they set out to do!

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

3. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

We probably have fewer numbers than almost any special interest group in the world, right up there with amateur radio operators who manufacture their own tubes and only transmit Morse code with an antique telegraph key. They may outnumber us, in fact.

Neither Eu nor Phix is going to ever become well known or widely used. It's probably good mental exercise to play with these, at least until the plague is over and we can go back to doing more fun things.

Besides, we can always claim to be part of one of the most exclusive groups in the world, only 0.000000001% of the population are members. blink

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

4. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

euphoric said...

Pete doesn't like namespaces

True. Increased ambiguity, increased potential for mishap, resolving multiple instances within a component requires replicating the include structure, potential for help lookup to go wrong.
When namespaces are used for their original intended purpose, to resolve conflicts without having to modify 3rd party code, that's fine. Anything that threatens or weakens that is not a good idea.
The include system is subtly different between Euphoria and Phix, so you're just asking for trouble. If you can stomach myLib_new() over myLib:new(), you should. </rant>

euphoric said...

Will Phix reach a version 1.0?

I have retrospectively nominated 0.8.0 as the "1.0" moment, in my very biased opinion it (well, certainly 0.8.1) genuinely deserved it. The next release will be 1.0.3, or maybe 1.1

euphoric said...

It would be interesting to see if Pete has a multi-year plan or if he's just taking it day by day.

Yes I have a plan, and it's going quite well, but it's very ambitious and I'm not saying any more than that.

euphoric said...

will more than 10 people use either?

I've just counted 20 Phix users active in the last 12 months off the top of my head, still small but a definite increase on the year before.

euphoric said...

make RAD real. For example, if Microsoft gives us the MAUI they prophesy, it's going to be hard to beat. That's a big if, but a huge reward if they accomplish what they set out to do!

Good luck with that! I had a little lookie, more than a touch of deja vu, and more than a little giggle, when they got to the obligatory "This button has been clicked 1 times" demo, superficially renamed as "Today I will add 18 lines of code", which is another good joke all by itself!

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

5. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

GreenEuphorian said...

Judging by the content of the forum, it would seem that as of today Phix is much more used than OE nowadays. But is this really the case? If so, could we regard Phix as the de facto 'flagship' version/variant of Euphoria? (I know, Phix is different from Eu, but still...) This is not just an academic question, I believe, because a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

I hope this is not going to hurt anyone's feelings, but the overall impression one gets is that the usage trend of OE is going downwards. I honestly would be happy if someone disproved this. Phix, of course, is on an upwards trend and its future looks brighter than OE's. It is also being much more actively developed (and more thoroughly documented too, in terms of code examples - Pete's wealth of code examples at Rosetta Code, more than 1200 tasks completed, virtually all of the required tasks, is impressive!).

Could you please share your thoughts about the points I mentioned above?

Feel free to disagree with me, but please nicely.

You're not wrong. Bringing this up does cause me to feel hurt, but it's certainly not because of you or anyone else in particular. It hurts to think about this but this is something I think we need to face and to discuss. Euphoria is one of my most favorite things in the world and it's something I feel is Very Importantâ„¢ to the world. It's a language I wish more people used and I wish more people knew of and cared about and I truly believe it could be a great asset to developers everywhere. From best I can tell, this is my twentieth year using Euphoria, or at least being active in the community.

As for the direction of OpenEuphoria, official releases, etc. I'm not sure what there is to say. I keep pecking away at things in a vacuum, whenever I have time (which is sporadic at best), and without any particular direction. I've been getting treatment for my ADHD and that's been going well, but my main goal is improving focus at home and work, so hobbies unfortunately take lower priority (although I'm sure that comes as no surprise to anyone). You can tell when I find a block of time to be particularly focused because I'll have dozens of changes and updates on something in a matter of hours.

I'm not sure what Shawn's been up to, but as far as I'm aware we're the only two who have even so much touched the source code recently. We need more people actively contributing or heck, even attempting to contribute. Last time I asked for help it was on editing and proofreading the documentation. And I was met with six different suggestions on how to edit the documentation and not one single person actually took up my request and tried to follow through on actually doing it. So hopefully you'll understand that being met with that kind of response is quite demotivating when you're just trying to keep your head above the water. If anyone is willing to learn how the current build system work, I'll gladly walk them through it. I think that's the first step to working on a new release.

Now regarding Phix: I don't think I have the right words for how I feel about Phix. I don't want to be critical of Pete's work. I like that Pete has added so many new features to the language but I have a very hard time looking at everything about Phix and then feeling... uncomfortable. I think the best way to describe it is that Phix falls into the uncanny valley for me. It closely resembles what I think Euphoria should be but at the same time it feels strange and foreign somehow. I think a lot of that has to do with the way Pete's named things ("p-this" and "p-that") and his heavy use of inline assembly language (it's veryveryvery hard for me to grok) or the black magic of automatic includes. And while Pete's documentation may be thorough in content, the whole Phix website is hard to navigate in general and that makes finding things very difficult. All that said, it's nice to see what Pete is doing and he and Phix are welcome here any time.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

6. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

euphoric said...

I have been with this community since almost day one. I think my first version of Euphoria was 1.2. I still had the floppy disks until a few months ago, but I made sure to take pics of them before I tossed 'em. smile (I moved several states away and to a smaller residence, so I tried to downsize as much as possible... even trinkets and floppy disks.)

I have loved being here and appreciate the huge amounts of unpaid effort that has gone into both Euphoria and Phix.

My best search shows May 1997, so that's close to 24 years. https://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/34528.wc. The earliest mailing list messages seem to be from around 1995-96.

euphoric said...
GreenEuphorian said...

...a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

That's a tough one. I'm not sure how much Euphoria development is going on, but it's most likely being done, if at all, by Greg and Shawn. Greg does have an MVC project he's developing, and I suspect Euphoria will benefit from that. But as to which one a new person should use?

MVC has been my focus because that's what scratches the biggest itch for me, as I have personal projects that can and will benefit from that.

euphoric said...
GreenEuphorian said...

...the overall impression one gets is that the usage trend of OE is going downwards... Phix, of course, is on an upwards trend and its future looks brighter than OE's.

Neither language is used by that many people, so that shouldn't even be a factor.

And the downward usage trend has been the case for a long while. I don't expect either language is growing from outside the community. If anything, people using Euphoria are switching to Phix because of its activity here (or using both when appropriate). I suspect the overall Eu/Phix community is shrinking, and the remaining population is shifting between the two or migrating to Phix. (I have absolutely no idea about numbers. I'm just assuming and guessing. The guys who run the web sites will know more about traffic.)

I can confirm that forum activity has been declining steadily since 2015. I'll try to put together some numbers and charts.

euphoric said...
GreenEuphorian said...

[Phix] is also being much more actively developed (and more thoroughly documented too, in terms of code examples - Pete's wealth of code examples at Rosetta Code, more than 1200 tasks completed, virtually all of the required tasks, is impressive!).

I think this is true (and definitely impressive, especially for a one man show!). Despite Greg's (and Shawn's?) excellent contributions and efforts, Euphoria is probably not going to see another version, and I'm not sure it can be competitive again in today's marketplace. I'm not sure what Euphoria's market is anymore.

While I don't want to believe this, I'll admit you may be correct. While I have a lot of ideas for how to move things forward and inject Euphoria back into the mainstream, I simply do not have the time to put in any significant effort toward that, and I find myself stymied by seemingly-trivial problems that I need to fix, but never do, and so the bigger things never even get started.

euphoric said...

The bright spots I see for Euphoria/Phix is Euphoria-MVC and Phix+GTK. But will more than 10 people use either? Again, that's something the makers can answer better than I.

I built a business with tools I developed using Euphoria, and I'll always be grateful for Rob Craig's (and then the community's) baby. It was awesome for my needs for several decades. But I'm migrating to other languages simply because there are other modern tools with great (e.g., superior) development environments that make RAD real.

For example, if Microsoft gives us the MAUI they prophesy, it's going to be hard to beat. That's a big if, but a huge reward if they accomplish what they set out to do!

The only "RAD" tools I see in any mainstream langauges is command line utilities for bootstrapping and managing application packages. Things like composer or cargo or pip. They can help you manage dependencies, create new projects, run database migrations, etc. If what you want is a desktop GUI builder then friend, I think Visual Studio's WinForms designer is the last of a dying breed (hey, that sounds familiar). Modern applications are web-based and "serverless" and all that crap. (But I mean "crap" in a nice way.) Even modern desktop applications are still web-based, using Electron and whatnot.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

7. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

irv said...

Besides, we can always claim to be part of one of the most exclusive groups in the world, only 0.000000001% of the population are members. blink

Exclusivity has its benefits! It's always fun to brag to people:

"You know, I'm one of the leading experts in my field."
"Oh, really? And which field is that?"
"The Euphoria programming language."
"...I have no idea what that is."

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

8. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...
irv said...

Besides, we can always claim to be part of one of the most exclusive groups in the world, only 0.000000001% of the population are members. blink

Exclusivity has its benefits! It's always fun to brag to people:

"You know, I'm one of the leading experts in my field."
"Oh, really? And which field is that?"
"The Euphoria programming language."
"...I have no idea what that is."

-Greg

To which you reply "Of course you wouldn't." blink

But to be honest, look at the 400+ programming languages represented on Rosettacode. A guess would be that half or more are in the same state as Euphoria, with few (perhaps only one) user remaining.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

9. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[edited for misunderstanding]

Kat

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

10. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

duplicate post deleted

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

11. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

For Phix, the biggest obstacle for a beginner is the documentation, which includes everything plus the kitchen sink.

It would be much clearer if it could be broken up so that things like LiteZip, Curl, IUP, etc were in their own domains and platforms, and could be referenced when and if a programmer was ready for those things.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

12. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...

It hurts to think about this but this is something I think we need to face and to discuss.

Indeed. We are fighting a downhill battle, and somehow still losing. In my mind there is one, and only one, gigantic stumbling block: running Euphoria/Phix in a browser, with a reasonable gui and some kind of file/database support. I am completely and utterly lost regarding the latter, perhaps wrongly I suspect you might think that is perhaps the easiest part?

Edit: ah, of course, I get it now, this would do it: http://www.tizag.com/ajaxTutorial/ajax-mysql-database.php
The obvious bit I missed is the response must be a string, so it is html or json, period. (Well, maybe more javascript, but let's just not go there.)

ghaberek said...

the uncanny valley for me. It closely resembles what I think Euphoria should be but at the same time it feels strange and foreign somehow.

Absolutely. The world needs less people who run to their divorce lawyer the moment someone they fancy moves in next door
[just to be very clear, a broken/toxic/abusive relationship is a valid reason to end a marriage, dishy new neighbour ain't].

ghaberek said...

"p-this" and "p-that"

Do you just mean an excess of files in builtins that begin with a 'p'?
That [probably] started out as a way to have (a modified copy of) Euphoria's file.e and a Phix pfile.e both in the same builtins/ directory [or include/ as it probably was back then].
Not particularly very difficult to change, or even make "include pfile.e" issue "warning: that is now called file.e" before loading the right one and carrying on.
(Worryingly, I just found out my pfactors.e was apparently last modified 12th January 1882...)

ghaberek said...

inline assembly language (it's veryveryvery hard for me to grok)

You are not alone. Do you for some strange reason think that I find it easy? pHeap.e is a monster and I dread ever having to go back there...

ghaberek said...

black magic of automatic includes

Rhetorical riposte, which is weirder: (a) the strange shop where the staff somehow know the specific shelf on which the stuff they sell is suitably stacked, or, (b) the shocked shopper?

ghaberek said...

the whole Phix website is hard to navigate

Working on wp made me realise for the first time just how truly awful the website really is. Suggestions and/or complaints warmly welcome.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

13. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

irv said...

For Phix, the biggest obstacle for a beginner is the documentation, which includes everything plus the kitchen sink.

It would be much clearer if it could be broken up so that things like LiteZip, Curl, IUP, etc were in their own domains and platforms, and could be referenced when and if a programmer was ready for those things.

No one ever said that before. (You are probably numb to it, but surely it is ten times better than https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ - I mean, look at it honestly.)

Might the real problem simply be

Introduction 
Core Language 
Library Routines 
Other Libraries 
Recommended Tools 
Internals 
Glossary 

I mean, it's not really communicating anything that, is it? No indication that you need to read the Core Language, and everything after that is reference only.
I will freely admit that I often get stuck on the "top-level" pages, with half a mind to just leave it blank. On details I'm fine, broad overview and narrative structure not so much.
Is not the problem simply that the Other Libraries page is, to put it bluntly, utter sh*te.

PS My pet hate is the official Ruby docs. I quite like the language, but every page seems to scroll forever, and for instance what the pig is this: https://ruby-doc.org/core-3.0.0/doc/syntax_rdoc.html - like the same bunch of irrelevant files you get everywhere on the left, and not one single link anywhere on the right hand side of that page??

The very best language document for navigation has to be https://www.w3schools.com/jsref/

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

14. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

petelomax said...

...surely it is ten times better than https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ - I mean, look at it honestly.

grin

No, and for one reason: search.

Give me search, Pete! smile

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

15. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

euphoric said...

grin

No, and for one reason: search.

Give me search, Pete! smile

The .chm has a search feature, which is crowded with all the things I mentioned earlier, so that it's difficult to find stuff.

Anyway, I don't mean to be overly critical. Just pointing out that there may be a better way to reach newcomers.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

16. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

irv said...
euphoric said...

grin

No, and for one reason: search.

Give me search, Pete! smile

The .chm has a search feature, which is crowded with all the things I mentioned earlier, so that it's difficult to find stuff.

Anyway, I don't mean to be overly critical. Just pointing out that there may be a better way to reach newcomers.

Oh, dang it! I forgot about that. From what I remember, the CHM help is really good.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

17. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

euphoric said...
petelomax said...

...surely it is ten times better than https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ - I mean, look at it honestly.

No, and for one reason: search.

Remind me, how do you do a search on https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ (and no, I am not being sarcastic or flippant!)

euphoric said...

Give me search, Pete! smile

erm, https://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/134957.wc ??

OK, I have now downloaded Euphoria-4.0.5-html, since I know that you do get a search on a local copy, and taken a look at index.html and search.js.
I can tell you it is case sensitive, exact-only, and indexes no more than 2045 terms, many of which are title phrases such as "As a first programming language",
which only works at all for that exact full and correct case input, even one character out and it's "not found" time.
In comparison phix.chm has 2774 single-word terms in the index, you typically get the right page half way through typing, plus it actually has a real and semi-decent[1] search,
so for instance "external" turns up eleven potential page matches in phix.chm, vs. zero on Euphoria, even though I chose that specifically because it was right there in front of me.
[1] while the index is kinda auto-complete, the search is exact-whole-word-only, which is what I meant by "semi-decent", eg "xternal" gets nothing, as of course does Eu.
So, again, why is the search function in the Euphoria docs any better?

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

18. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

OK, thinking laterally and out loud, I have been married to the chm format for a long time now, but maybe for all the wrong reasons.

In theory, it really should not be all that difficult to craft a standalone Phix program that behaves much like a chm file, only even better.

Then we could really go to town, have a "[]beginner []intermediate []advanced" radio group, a proper and even better full-text search (with history), the possibilities are endless.

It won't happen overnight, I will need help, it will need most of the steps to be automated, and it may take us into next year or even the year after...

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

19. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[deleted]

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

20. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

petelomax said...
euphoric said...
petelomax said...

...surely it is ten times better than https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ - I mean, look at it honestly.

No, and for one reason: search.

Remind me, how do you do a search on https://openeuphoria.org/docs/ (and no, I am not being sarcastic or flippant!)

Click the "manual" tab. Then use the search box in the upper right.

petelomax said...
euphoric said...

Give me search, Pete! smile

erm, https://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/134957.wc ??

Yes, now I remember! It's been a while that I've been able to use Eu/Phix, unfortunately. getlost

petelomax said...

I can tell you it is case sensitive, exact-only, and indexes no more than 2045 terms, many of which are title phrases such as "As a first programming language",
which only works at all for that exact full and correct case input, even one character out and it's "not found" time.

Yeah, the search isn't good. I've been frustrated by it many times.

petelomax said...

So, again, why is the search function in the Euphoria docs any better?

It's not! I retract my prior false statements! grin

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

21. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

GreenEuphorian said...

Judging by the content of the forum, it would seem that as of today Phix is much more used than OE. But is this really the case? If so, could we regard Phix as the de facto 'flagship' version/variant of Euphoria? (I know, Phix is different from Eu, but still...) This is not just an academic question, I believe, because a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

First of all, Phix was, is and will be a clone of the EUPHORIA programming language, nothing more.
Just a clone. Brilliant, outstanding, superb but a clone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clone_(computing)
The EU source code was secret C and EU texts.
The Phix source code was secret FASM texts.
But syntax of both languages was PURE EU syntax,
that excellent state of the art syntax, some features
of which now has stylish Lua.
Read please:
https://www.rapideuphoria.com/reg.htm
There are registered users of Euphoria 2.5 and earlier in 67 countries!
But what about some registered OE or Phix users?
So, for now we have just rocky stable EUPHORIA language
users of classic 2.5 and 3.1.1 and some new peoples...
Registered vs not! smile

http://pl-euphoria.narod.ru/logo-fin-01.png

Regards


kinz

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

22. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

A clone of Euphoria, nothing more?

Sorry, I disagree.

What I see is a more efficient and more versatile implementation of the Euphoria concept, with the addition of things people have been asking for over the years, but never got.

What about structures and classes? These are very useful, no version of Eu has them. Try/catch?

What about compiling large programs in less than 1 second? Phix does, Euphoria has always been slow, and later versions are extremely slow.

As for "There are registered users of Euphoria 2.5 and earlier in 67 countries!" - that's completely irrelevant. Most of those long ago moved to other languages (or died of old age).

"Where are the registered users of Eu or Phix?" There is no register!

I do agree that Eu 2.x and 3.x are simple and stable. The problem is, people in this century expect complex programs. Complex programs can be written in a simple language (with a great deal of wasted effort).

It's also possible to build a car, starting out with re-inventing the wheel. It's generally more productive and less risky to just use existing wheels and other parts rather than designing, building, and testing your own.

If Elon Musk had said "I'm going to make an electric car", and started by building a plant to manufacture rubber for the tires, he would be broke by now.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

23. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

kinz said...

First of all, Phix was, is and will be a clone of the EUPHORIA programming language, nothing more.
Just a clone. Brilliant, outstanding, superb but a clone.

irv said...

A clone of Euphoria, nothing more?

Sorry, I disagree.

Yeah I'm with irv on this one. I don't think "clone" is the right word.

I think of RDS Euphoria as the reference implementation of a de facto specification for the "Euphoria language" in general.

I'm not aware of Rob ever publishing a distinct "specification document" for the language but what's in the reference manual is pretty close.

Phix and OpenEuphoria are then dialects of that original language specification: two now-different languages related by a common ancestor.

There have been a variety of other dialects as well, like Matt's OOEU or Karl's Bach.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

24. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[deleted]

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

25. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

katsmeow said...

So, just dancing around the same campfire, reiterating the same fire every night, maybe with a different type of tree occasionally.

Not going to the moon or Mars. Not building a Dyson's Ring. Not knowing why anyone would want to. Not knowing they even exist. Stop now, it's so euphoric.

...what?

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

26. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[deleted]

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

27. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[deleted]

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

28. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

katsmeow said...

But it's all about not taking big steps to improve programming with OE, it's all about NOT making more features possible?

I literally never said this. And this summary of my statement couldn't be more untrue. I want to see a lot more things come to Euphoria. I want Euphoria to be a mainstream, fully-featured, stable and competent competitor to any other popular language available today. In fact, I am pretty sure I started my response to this thread with that same sentiment:

ghaberek said...

Euphoria is one of my most favorite things in the world and it's something I feel is Very Importantâ„¢ to the world. It's a language I wish more people used and I wish more people knew of and cared about and I truly believe it could be a great asset to developers everywhere.

katsmeow said...

So i made the analogy of OE being the fire, and Bach, OOEU, Phix, etc being simply white pine, or poplar, or dogwood, all being the same, on the same fire, the same place, the same language.

I think you've misinterpreted my "dialect" analogy. Spoken languages grow and evolve over time. Sometimes they branch off of each other to create new languages. Sometimes they die off with the people and cultures that used them. Regardless, the life cycle of any language is a thing that exists in the world, good, bad, or indifferent. And programming languages are really no different than that, except that they often live and die much faster than spoken languges.

katsmeow said...

It's getting to be as old as neaderthals dancing around the fire,

I have great aspirations and I am inclined to believe everyone else here aspires for great things as well. My failure to continue moving this project forward are not for want of aspirations. I like the features that Pete is implementing in Phix. Things I'd like to see in Euphoria include threads, classes, and a built in compiler, all of which Phix now has. But I have entirely different ideas on how they should behave or be implemented within Euphoria itself and Pete's heavy use of Assembly language make porting those things back to Euphoria almost entirely impossible, at least for me.

katsmeow said...

not aspiring to do more in computering.

I do plenty of "computering" elsewhere but unfortunately I find myself in a continuous Catch-22 paradox: I cannot use Euphoria for my work projects because it is not modern enough for those purposes, and I have not been able to bring Euphoria up to speed due to my continued effort on my work projects. What's kind of sad and ironic is that most of my work projects use WinForms, which itself is now considered to be "outdated" by more "modern" developers that I encounter.

katsmeow said...

Today, at least, fire is used to make car engines run, steam turbines make electricity. But OE cannot really do any more to munge data today than was done in a Vic20 or C64 or ZX80 or Apple 40 years ago.

I completely disagree with this statement. Firstly, because data munging hasn't really changed in the entire history of electronic computing. Aside from other branches of computer science like quantum computing and machine learning, all the data we ever process is still just some series of bytes and bits and I think Euphoria is still very well suited to that type of work. And second, because I have recently implemented several new tools for processing "modern" forms of data, such as my JSON, HTML, and template parsers. And I apologize if I have not communicated this enough recently, so I'll say it again: Euphoria MVC is mostly a testbed for features that I would like to eventually move to the Euphoria standard library.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

29. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

I am going to snip text here and there (in the interest of post size) and i respectfully hope i do not mess up the intended messages...

ghaberek said...
katsmeow said...

But it's all about not taking big steps to improve programming with OE, it's all about NOT making more features possible?

I literally never said this. And this summary of my statement couldn't be more untrue. I want to see a lot more things come to Euphoria.

And then you limited the expansion of OE to the usual stuff in almost all languages....

ghaberek said...

Things I'd like to see in Euphoria include threads, classes, and a built in compiler, all of which Phix now has.

I am not against all that, i'd like to see a bit of it too, i was very happy to see Matt's OOEU, and i did play with the early Bach versions. If you remember, around that time frame, i was experimenting with swapping code in the form of DLLs in and out of running programs by using load/unload, and found a huge memory leak in the process. Using DLLs had other problems, and no one was in favor of the feature. I also recently acknowledged this...

ghaberek said...

But I have entirely different ideas on how they should behave or be implemented within Euphoria itself

as one of the perfectly valid reasons OE stopped growing. I later edited my post away.

ghaberek said...

I think you've misinterpreted my "dialect" analogy. Spoken languages grow and evolve over time..... And programming languages are really no different than that...

But OE isn't growing, changing, evolving, splintering, except for Phix. And i applaud Phix, but i cannot help but fear it will be constrained to one incremental step of growth.

ghaberek said...

I have great aspirations .....

Like i deleted the DLL swapping code years ago, and most of irc.e years before that, a couple days ago i deleted all the globally sharing code. It's big step stuff OE could do, regardless of what features it has in common with other languages. I don't want to compare OE/Phix to other current languages, but there's things i could do with computers 30+ years ago that i cannot do in any language on any modern computer!

ghaberek said...

I do plenty of "computering" elsewhere but unfortunately I find myself in a continuous Catch-22 paradox: I cannot use Euphoria for my work projects because it is not modern enough for those purposes,

I meant "computering" with and within OE itself. At least catching up to OOEU.

ghaberek said...
katsmeow said...

Today, at least, fire is used to make car engines run, steam turbines make electricity. But OE cannot really do any more to munge data today than was done in a Vic20 or C64 or ZX80 or Apple 40 years ago.

I completely disagree with this statement. Firstly, because data munging hasn't really changed in the entire history of electronic computing.

Ok, how many modern languages allow you to stop the program, fiddle around in the variables, edit some source code, and restart at any point in the program (with caveats) as if it was never stopped? How many allow you to swap source code while running, like i did with DLLs? How many allow the program to build a list of the variables and then look at the values? How many languages come ready to communicate to the world (at the table-top level) the physical computer? I did all that and more in the early 1980's, and cannot with a modern language, so i must stand by what i said.

ghaberek said...

Aside from other branches of computer science like quantum computing and machine learning, all the data we ever process is still just some series of bytes and bits and I think Euphoria is still very well suited to that type of work.....

Quantum computing is a physical process inherently multi-threaded, but OE cannot handle threads. And OE cannot know what it does and does not know, so machine learning is out. What i did with global vars had one huge gotcha: it was very convoluted and buggy to get the entire program (or series of programs) to use new proceedures added during runtime (this was also a problem with swapping DLLS).

ghaberek said...

And second, because I have recently implemented several new tools for processing "modern" forms of data, such as my JSON, HTML, and template parsers.

You do not think form manipulation and parsing was done 40+ years ago? Did you forget i had added a SGML parser to a strtok version many years ago? Perhaps you remember the overt fighting it caused, over the use of "strings", "tokens" (words), thereby causing the destruction of the basic concept of Eu itself. In 1990 i began converting a dictionary to be an XML table, and it was years later before i got online with win95B.

I can agree with you, Greg, that having modern features in OE would be helpful, despite those who say OE should be as simplistic as RobC intended Euphoria to be in version 1.0 some 20+ years ago. I have said OE needs bigger steps beyond other languages. What you and i have in common, in terms of modernising OE, is that the current users of OE have no need of any new features. Do you realise that when i put out strtok that no mainstream language had that library, and they added it quickly, but it was years later OE officially added the functionality to the language?

I respect your contributions and efforts Greg, and ditto to Pete and Phix, and Matt-Derek-Jiri-DavidC-etc, but while playing catch-up to other languages, can you also please leapfrog them? And by "leapfrog" i mean also add the functions (by the same or different means) enjoyed by programmers 40 years ago.

To wrap this up, it's fine with me if Phix is a standard, but "standard" implies "static", and OE is already static.

Kat

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

30. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

[deleted]

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

31. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

GreenEuphorian said...

This is not just an academic question, I believe, because a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

I strongly recommend to download and learn RDS EU 3.1.1.
It is final version of pure classic EUPHORIA with great
history, documentation and proved golden features.

Regards


kinz

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

32. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

kinz said...
GreenEuphorian said...

This is not just an academic question, I believe, because a total newcomer would want to know which of the two languages they had better investing their learning efforts in.

I strongly recommend to download and learn RDS EU 3.1.1.
It is final version of pure classic EUPHORIA with great
history, documentation and proved golden features.

Regards


kinz

What you say is completely true. 3.1 is small, stable, versatile, and easy to learn.

That doesn't mean it can attract newcomers. The phrase: "they don't know what they don't know" - applies here. Programming is hard. They expect it to be easy.

The problem is, people are turned off by text-mode programs (that's so last-century), and when they learn the difficulties involved with creating a modern-looking program with Euphoria (or Phix), they go elsewhere.

(Only to find out that programming is still hard!)

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

33. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

katsmeow said...

I can agree with you, Greg, that having modern features in OE would be helpful, despite those who say OE should be as simplistic as RobC intended Euphoria to be in version 1.0 some 20+ years ago. I have said OE needs bigger steps beyond other languages. What you and i have in common, in terms of modernising OE, is that the current users of OE have no need of any new features. Do you realise that when i put out strtok that no mainstream language had that library, and they added it quickly, but it was years later OE officially added the functionality to the language?

I respect your contributions and efforts Greg, and ditto to Pete and Phix, and Matt-Derek-Jiri-DavidC-etc, but while playing catch-up to other languages, can you also please leapfrog them? And by "leapfrog" i mean also add the functions (by the same or different means) enjoyed by programmers 40 years ago.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. If Euphoria has any chance to survive in the future, it needs to move ahead and not just play catch-up.

Can you do me a huge favor? Would it be possible to put together a list of these ideas and improvements for modernizing Euphoria? Either post it here or email me directly if you wish.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

34. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...

Can you do me a huge favor? Would it be possible to put together a list of these ideas and improvements for modernizing Euphoria? Either post it here or email me directly if you wish.

-Greg

Please, post it here because we are all interested.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

35. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

<meta name="deleted" content="content has been deleted">deleted</meta>

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

36. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

petelomax said...

<meta name="deleted" content="content has been deleted">deleted</meta>

That's metadata about the [deleted] tag. Thanks a bunch.

Kat

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

37. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

katsmeow said...
petelomax said...

<meta name="deleted" content="content has been deleted">deleted</meta>

That's metadata about the [deleted] tag. Thanks a bunch.

What's up with all these "deleted" comments from Pete? Have I missed something?

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

38. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...

I think you've hit the nail on the head. If Euphoria has any chance to survive in the future, it needs to move ahead and not just play catch-up.

Can you do me a huge favor? Would it be possible to put together a list of these ideas and improvements for modernizing Euphoria? Either post it here or email me directly if you wish.

-Greg

I would like to decline. I feel each suggestion will start a new separate flame war, gradually growing more personal. This is historically how Euphorum works. Pete is already posting [deleted] , so i went back and [deleted] a post or two of mine. Suggestions cause bad feelings.

Kat

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

39. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...
petelomax said...

<meta name="deleted" content="content has been deleted">deleted</meta>

What's up with all these "deleted" comments from Pete? Have I missed something?

I deleted a mistake, got a weird reply, made a joke. Now it's personal. Have I missed something?

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

40. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

petelomax said...
ghaberek said...
petelomax said...

<meta name="deleted" content="content has been deleted">deleted</meta>

What's up with all these "deleted" comments from Pete? Have I missed something?

I deleted a mistake, got a weird reply, made a joke. Now it's personal. Have I missed something?

Most of my posts for years were deleted, so i see you posting [deleted] , i don't see humor. And i don't see humor in OE losing userbase. And i didn't think asking for additional info to be wierd. Obviously then this forum is in a different mind-space than i am, and i have nothing to contribute in your mind-space.

Kat

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

41. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

ghaberek said...

I have great aspirations .....

katsmeow said...

And then you limited the expansion of OE to the usual stuff in almost all languages....

Sounds more like Greg simply hasn't had time to get to the bigger things.

ghaberek said...

Things I'd like to see in Euphoria include threads, classes, and a built in compiler, all of which Phix now has.

katsmeow said...

I am not against all that, i'd like to see a bit of it too, i was very happy to see Matt's OOEU, and i did play with the early Bach versions.

Heavy check mark.

katsmeow said...

If you remember, around that time frame, i was experimenting with swapping code in the form of DLLs in and out of running programs by using load/unload, and found a huge memory leak in the process. Using DLLs had other problems, and no one was in favor of the feature. I also recently acknowledged this...

Sounds like quite a nice project.

ghaberek said...

But I have entirely different ideas on how they should behave or be implemented within Euphoria itself

katsmeow said...

as one of the perfectly valid reasons OE stopped growing.

Greg having different ideas on how things should be implemented by itself wouldn't actually hinder OE's development. The bigger problem is that Phix is self-hosting and relies on assembly too deeply to allow for easy integration into OE. At this point, it's probably easier to reimplement the small handful of things that OE has which Phix lacks (if there is anything) for Phix, and then go on from there.

katsmeow said...

I later edited my post away.

katsmeow said...

But OE isn't growing, changing, evolving, splintering,

I hit the same nail that you, Greg, etc all got. I set up experimental branches for things like threads and string execution, hoping to get help after feeling the job was too big for me to finish myself. No one ever came.

katsmeow said...

except for Phix. And i applaud Phix, but i cannot help but fear it will be constrained to one incremental step of growth.

I too hope that this does not happen.

katsmeow said...

Like i deleted the DLL swapping code years ago, and most of irc.e years before that, a couple days ago i deleted all the globally sharing code. It's big step stuff OE could do, regardless of what features it has in common with other languages.

As I've said elsewhere, this is quite the shame. The current team would quite happily accept virtually all of this.

ghaberek said...

I do plenty of "computering" elsewhere but unfortunately I find myself in a continuous Catch-22 paradox: I cannot use Euphoria for my work projects because it is not modern enough for those purposes,

I also have this problem.

katsmeow said...

I meant "computering" with and within OE itself. At least catching up to OOEU.

This at least is fairly easy. The reason that OE is missing some features that OOEU had is because mattlewis, the author of OOEU, didn't want to add them to OE. It wouldn't be too hard to take the code from OOEU and get it merged into OE at this point.

katsmeow said...

I don't want to compare OE/Phix to other current languages, but there's things i could do with computers 30+ years ago that i cannot do in any language on any modern computer!

Today, at least, fire is used to make car engines run, steam turbines make electricity. But OE cannot really do any more to munge data today than was done in a Vic20 or C64 or ZX80 or Apple 40 years ago.

ghaberek said...

I completely disagree with this statement. Firstly, because data munging hasn't really changed in the entire history of electronic computing.

Seconded.

katsmeow said...

Ok, how many modern languages allow you to stop the program, fiddle around in the variables, edit some source code, and restart at any point in the program (with caveats) as if it was never stopped?

Virtually all of them. Java (done it in Eclipse and IntelliJ), C# (via Visual Studio), Javascript, ...

I believe I've even done this with C and gdb, of all things..

But not Eu.

katsmeow said...

How many allow you to swap source code while running, like i did with DLLs?

Okay, this is a bit trickier for Java, but see above with editing source code - you can simulate most of this with that.

katsmeow said...

How many allow the program to build a list of the variables and then look at the values?

Both Java and C# allow this via reflection (with some caveats). I'm less familiar with the JavsScript reflection api, but it's there, so I assume it can be done as well.

katsmeow said...

How many languages come ready to communicate to the world (at the table-top level) the physical computer?

This is more of a distribution issue. I can name a whole bunch if you count Linux/GNU computers that are shipped from vendors like System76.

katsmeow said...

I did all that and more in the early 1980's, and cannot with a modern language, so i must stand by what i said.

And I stand by Greg here. But I'd agree with the both of you that OE lacks this.

katsmeow said...

And OE cannot know what it does and does not know, so machine learning is out.

Actually, Python is a popular language with machine learning. I imagine that it wouldn't be too hard to rewrite something like SciPy in Eu if someone were interested...

katsmeow said...

What i did with global vars had one huge gotcha: it was very convoluted and buggy to get the entire program (or series of programs) to use new proceedures added during runtime (this was also a problem with swapping DLLS).

Still worthwhile, imvho.

ghaberek said...

And second, because I have recently implemented several new tools for processing "modern" types of data, such as my JSON, HTML, and template parsers.

katsmeow said...

You do not think form manipulation and parsing was done 40+ years ago?

Two different things -> "modern types of data" vs "form manipulation"

katsmeow said...

Did you forget i had added a SGML parser to a strtok version many years ago? Perhaps you remember the overt fighting it caused, over the use of "strings", "tokens" (words),

I don't - sounds like it was before my time here.

katsmeow said...

thereby causing the destruction of the basic concept of Eu itself.

Well .. I can assure you that this wouldn't be the case today.

katsmeow said...

To wrap this up, it's fine with me if Phix is a standard,

Seconded.

katsmeow said...

but "standard" implies "static", and OE is already static.

Kat

Agreed, sadly.

ghaberek said...

Can you do me a huge favor? Would it be possible to put together a list of these ideas and improvements for modernizing Euphoria? Either post it here or email me directly if you wish.

katsmeow said...

I would like to decline.

Sad to hear it.

katsmeow said...

Suggestions cause bad feelings.

Some people need to grow thicker armour. Fortunately, most of those seem to no longer be active in the community.

katsmeow said...

I feel each suggestion will start a new separate flame war, gradually growing more personal. This is historically how Euphorum works.

Not since we introduced the code of conduct and introduced better moderation (policies which apply to this day).

I wouldn't dare tell you how you should spend your time, but I'd just like to make this point clear - if you ever decide to contribute anything again, no one will take it personally and your contributions will be treated with the value that they deserve.

katsmeow said...

Pete is already posting [deleted] , so i went back and [deleted] a post or two of mine.

Well, a friendly joke poking fun at the forum every now and then is still okay (assuming no CoC violation - in this case obviously there wasn't any.)

katsmeow said...

In 1990 i began converting a dictionary to be an XML table, and it was years later before i got online with win95B.

Ah! That explains why the earliest posts I knew of for you on this forum were from 1999. Very cool.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

42. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

irv said...

That doesn't mean it can attract newcomers. The phrase: "they don't know what they don't know" - applies here. Programming is hard. They expect it to be easy.

The problem is, people are turned off by text-mode programs (that's so last-century), and when they learn the difficulties involved with creating a modern-looking program with Euphoria (or Phix), they go elsewhere.

(Only to find out that programming is still hard!)

Seconded.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

43. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

I don't know the answer. Just getting that out there to set the scene. Also, I am very biased, having had a lot to do with the evolution of OpenEuphoria. And another thing, I'm not anywhere near as well versed on Phix.

I wanted to work on the making of OpenEuphoria because of two main things; RDS Euphoria was such a drop-dead gorgeous language that it deserves being used. Secondly, one of the more important purposes of programming languages is to present human-readable programs. RDS was not quite there, and OE is on its way to making the act of programming easier to make code that has clarity. And no, it's not there yet either, but I haven't given up on it. When I retire from paid employment, which is not far away now, I wish to help OE continue to evolve.

This rant probably doesn't help you much, but from my distant perspective, Phix is closer to RDS than where I'd like OE to be.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

44. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

petelomax said...

Indeed. We are fighting a downhill battle, and somehow still losing. In my mind there is one, and only one, gigantic stumbling block: running Euphoria/Phix in a browser, with a reasonable gui and some kind of file/database support. I am completely and utterly lost regarding the latter, perhaps wrongly I suspect you might think that is perhaps the easiest part?

For quite a few years now, the only GUI I've used has been the browser. You can make it do anything you want. My setup is:

I design and build the webpage(s) using Webix. It provides full HTML / Javascript / Ajax functionality. On the server are a number of 'helper' Euphoria programs. For example, to populate a dropdown menu with all of the .EDB databases, the Ajax call is to DB_list.eui. This will just ls *.edb > DB_list.txt. DB_list.eui then reads DB_list.txt and sends it back as output.

-- This program lists the 'edb' databases, and outputs them for a richedit control selection 
 
system_exec("ls -t *.edb > edb.txt" , 0) 
sList = read_lines("edb.txt") 
 
sBuffer = "[  \n" 
 
for i = 1 to length(sList) do 
	if i = length(sList) then 
		sBuffer = sBuffer & "{ \"id\":" & sprintf("%d",i) & ", \"value\":\""   &  sList[i]   &  "\"} \n" 
	else 
		sBuffer = sBuffer & "{ \"id\":" & sprintf("%d",i) & ", \"value\":\""   &  sList[i]   &  "\"}, \n" 
	end if 
end for 
 
sBuffer = sBuffer & "]\n" 
 
puts(1,"Content-type: application/json\n\n\n") 
puts(1, sBuffer) 
 

The calling Javascript is, clearly, expecting a Javascript response. Partial code:

webix.ui({ 
					rows: 
					[ 
					{height:10}, 
					{view:"fieldset", label:"Database Maintenance", height:80,css:"odd", 
					body:{ padding:2,//defining Fieldset body 
							rows:[ 
										{		cols:[ 
							                		{view:"richselect", id:"Database", options:"./find_database_names.eui", width:200, value:1}, 
							                		{}, 
				     								{view:"richselect", id:"Table", value:"Tables", options:"./greys_utilities.eui",width:200}, 
				     								{}, 
				     								{view:"template", id:"Entries_count", template:"entries",width:110, height:20}, 
				     								{}, 
				     								{view:"richselect", id:"Action", width:200, value:1, 
						     							options:[ 
												             { "id":1, "value":"Create_DB"}, 
												             { "id":2, "value":"Compact_DB"}, 
												             { "id":3, "value":"Add_Table"}, 
												             { "id":4, "value":"Delete_Table"}, 
												             { "id":5, "value":"Merge_Tables"}, 
												       		 { "id":6, "value":"Shrink_Fields"} 
										    							]}, 
 

A given application will have several of these helpers, for reading databases, processing data, etc. They're usually quite small and easy to write.

As for databases, I use the Euphoria database exclusively. I have never had the problems that others seem to have had, perhaps because I use a functional locking system to avoid conflicts.

For debugging, I have a few terminal tabs open, with (for example) 'tail -f /var/log/apache2/access log' (or error.log). Error messages are printed to STDERR, so that they show up in the Apache logs.

The development environment includes a webpage that shows the latest ex.err, and of course the formatted version using Antonio Alessi's program. It also shows the latest Apache errors. See screenshots.

I ensure that all programs can be run from the command line as well as calling them by url, even though they will, with clean code, crash because of lack of input (which would be provided in the calling url). Whenever any code changes are made, the command line invocation will show any syntax errors, which are difficult to troubleshoot otherwise. If all is OK, run it from the browser, check the dump if there's a fatal error, and check (as above) the error logs in real time to show any trouble-shooting messages.

This might not suit everyone, but it works well for me. Happy to answer any questions about the workflow.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

45. Re: Is Phix the new de facto standard for Eu programmers?

CraigWelch said...

For quite a few years now, the only GUI I've used has been the browser. You can make it do anything you want. My setup is:

I design and build the webpage(s) using Webix. It provides full HTML / Javascript / Ajax functionality.

Looks really nice. Got $2819 you can loan me?

If that's too much how about $449 for a one-year, one-programmer license to write one app? That's the cost without all the fancy stuff.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu