1. Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by jcowgar at bhsys.com
Nov 12, 2001
When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the general
feeling about Euphoria's
future?
I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just curious
about what people think about it's
future.
Thanks,
Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
2. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by euman at bellsouth.net
Nov 12, 2001
> When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the
general feeling about Euphoria's
> future?
>
> I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just
curious about what people think about it's
> future.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
Euphoria is a fairly easy, power rich, an fast aswell computer language.
There are several people who have more than 5 yrs with this language that
still
maintain a presence on the Listserve. I personally have some commercial
quality
application developed and currently being developed in Euphoria.
There are only a hand full of things I know of that arent implemented in
Euphoria *YET*
The Source to Euphoria will be available soon and this will I think take
Euphoria to the next
level and make Rob a richer man than he already is. Not to mention making
Euphoria
a choice above other languages such Basic, Java and well, just about
anyother language
out there. "My Opinion"
3. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hi Jeremy,
----------
> ïÔ: jcowgar at bhsys.com
> ëÏÍÕ: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> ôÅÍÁ: Euphoria's Future?
> äÁÔÁ: Monday, November 12, 2001 21:28
>
> When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the
general feeling about Euphoria's
> future?
>
> I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just
curious about what people think about it's
> future.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
Rob please don't read this text below,
you know about these things well enough 
Well.
Some people think Euphoria's Future
was & is & will be great!
But if without jokes, there is the very interesting
file in EUPHORIA\DOC directory - relnotes.doc.
40K of very useful information, read please,
this reading is pure euphoria, yes yes,
without jokes really
Also, visit please
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/news.htm
and click on the links in
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/othersit.htm
59 countries with registered users in the World,
about 50 personal Eu sites in the World,
300 authors contribute their programs to
RDS Archive, which is 800 excellent packages
for Dos-32, Win-32, Linux now.
You can just download any of that 800
packages and read readme.txt files to
see what people think about Euphoria.
There is very good thinking in these files.
Don't believe, check, inspect & check again.
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
4. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 12 Nov 2001, at 13:28, jcowgar at bhsys.com wrote:
>
> When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the
> general
> feeling about Euphoria's future?
>
> I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just
> curious
> about what people think about it's future.
I like Eu. With a few exceptions, it has everything i liked about Turbo Pascal,
but it is lacking a few things i liked about pascal. I still say Rob would do
good to add a few of the tricks from mirc. And the local goto command. But
except for those hurdles, and a better win32 stepping debugger, you get a lot
for your money with Euphoria.
Kat
5. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hello, Jeremy,
Welcome to Euphoria. I have been using Euphoria since version 1.4 in 1996 and
have been very happy with the language. Regardless of many people's
expectations, however; Euphoria is not the be-all end-all language many wish it
would be. It is an excellent language for many applications; and I assure you
that it will be a well-used addition to your programming arsenal. The core
language, development tools, libraries, and applications of Euphoria are
constantly being updated by a devoted team of users.
There are very few cases where I would choose C, C++, Java, or Visual Basic
over Euphoria for a particular task; but those cases do exist. As long as you
approach Euphoria with realistic expectations, I believe you will find Euphoria
to be your favorite tool on your PC or network.
Michael J. Sabal
>>> jcowgar at bhsys.com 11/12/01 01:28PM >>>
When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the general
feeling about Euphoria's
future?
I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just curious
about what people think about it's
future.
Thanks,
Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
6. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 jcowgar at bhsys.com wrote:
> What is the general feeling about Euphoria's
> future?
I'm gonna stick my head out for it to get chopped off.
I still hold to the old-fashioned weird theory that the superior product
wins, even tho it seems everyone disagrees. By "superior" I mean superior
in a given context; between two products, each can be superior to the
other in its own context and each will win over the other in its own
segment of the market.
Between Euphoria and C++/C#:
Euphoria will win over C++/C# where simplicity is more important than
efficiency.
C++ and C# will win over Euphoria where efficiency is more important
than simplicity.
( Unless the E2C translator .... )
As computers get more powerful, efficiency of programming languages gets
less important. ( e.g. the trend from compilers to interpreters )
This means that the advantage in speed that C++/C# has over Euphoria
will become less important as computers get faster.
As the computer world gets more complicated, simplicity of programming
languages gets more important.
From the above facts, I predict that Euphoria will become a
popular language. ( sticking my neck out for it to get chopped off )
On the other hand, the history of computers and programming suggests
that the future is hard to predict. How many people predicted linux?
the internet explosion? the rapid increase of computer power?
the domination of Microsoft? the rise of Netscape? the fall of
Netscape? Bill Gates made a laughing stock out of himself by predicting
that nobody will ever need more than 640K of RAM.
Jerry Story
7. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Nov 12, 2001
I think the future of Euphoria does not depend on its features, which are
extremely good, but on the marketing effort behind it.
I developed a bunch of programs in Euphoria with much more ease than in any
other language, except perhaps APL. Debugging at the source code is very
good in Euphoria. Speedwise, Euphoria is the best, I think, of all
interpreted languages.
I also think Euphoria is perfect to teach programming to beginners, without
sacrifying its usefulness for advanced applications. In other words, an
Euphoria program is simple if the task is simple, and unavoidably complex if
the task is complex, but less complex than, for example, a C program, with
its awkward pointers and memory allocations.
----- Original Message -----
From: <jcowgar at bhsys.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:28 PM
Subject: Euphoria's Future?
>
> When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the
general feeling about Euphoria's
> future?
>
> I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just
curious about what people think about it's
> future.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
>
>
>
>
8. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hi Rforno,
I was going to react to this topic but you took the words right off my
mouth. Marketing is the key to Euphoria's future. It needs a shiny box and
a good manual. I believe the strength of Euphoria is that it's
understandable for beginners but at the same time usefull for experts.
Bye,
Jasper.
rforno@tutopia
.com To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
cc:
13-11-2001 Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
02:43
Please respond
to EUforum
I think the future of Euphoria does not depend on its features, which are
extremely good, but on the marketing effort behind it.
I developed a bunch of programs in Euphoria with much more ease than in any
other language, except perhaps APL. Debugging at the source code is very
good in Euphoria. Speedwise, Euphoria is the best, I think, of all
interpreted languages.
I also think Euphoria is perfect to teach programming to beginners, without
sacrifying its usefulness for advanced applications. In other words, an
Euphoria program is simple if the task is simple, and unavoidably complex
if
the task is complex, but less complex than, for example, a C program, with
its awkward pointers and memory allocations.
----- Original Message -----
From: <jcowgar at bhsys.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:28 PM
Subject: Euphoria's Future?
>
> When was the last time Euphoria (the language) was updated? What is the
general feeling about Euphoria's
> future?
>
> I am new to Euphoria and like it so well, I registered it. I am now just
curious about what people think about it's
> future.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Cowgar - jcowgar at bhsys.com
>
>
9. Re: Euphoria's Future?
MTS,
oh MTS,
where arth thou?
: P!
10. Re: Euphoria's Future?
At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
<snip>
>It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
<snip>
xxxxxxxxxxx
I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb" is
a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
with Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand
and (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I have
ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe this
is one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost)
to translate the documentation to other languages.
High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
Keep up the good work all.
Regards,
FP.
11. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Nov 13, 2001
I agree on the comments for the manual. It is a very good piece of work.
But what is really meant by a "shiny box"? Maybe my English is not enough to
understand this idiomatic expression :).
----- Original Message -----
From: <freeplay at mailandnews.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
>
> At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
> <snip>
> >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
> <snip>
> xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
> already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb"
is
> a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
> with Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand
> and (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I
have
> ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe this
> is one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost)
> to translate the documentation to other languages.
>
> High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
> but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
>
> Keep up the good work all.
>
> Regards,
>
> FP.
>
>
>
>
12. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 13 Nov 2001, at 22:20, rforno at tutopia.com wrote:
>
> I agree on the comments for the manual. It is a very good piece of work.
> But what is really meant by a "shiny box"?
It's almost just what it says: a shiney box! Shrink wrapped, fancy colors, like
boxes that microsoft sells OSs in. The box is part of the advertising for the
product.
Kat
> Maybe my English is not enough to
> understand this idiomatic expression :). ----- Original Message ----- From:
> <freeplay at mailandnews.com> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com> Sent:
> Tuesday,
> November 13, 2001 6:37 PM Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
>
>
> > At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
> > <snip>
> > xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
> > already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb"
> is
> > a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
> > with
> > Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand and
> > (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I
> have
> > ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe this
> > is
> > one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost) to
> > translate the documentation to other languages.
> >
> > High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
> > but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
> >
> > Keep up the good work all.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > FP.
> >
> >
>
>
>
13. Re: Euphoria's Future?
I can imagine that the "shiny box" can be a metaphor for placing the product in
more prominent
position for consumers, as well as making it look attractive. The "box" can be
seen by the mass
market if it is in shops; literally on the shelf.
But the first question that RDS must ask itself is 'do we want to have a huge
market to support?'.
If they don't, then they are going about it the right way now. If they do, then
they have to get
into additional forms of product placement and marketing. This will bring on new
issues that one
gets automatically when one has a large customer base - and maybe Robert and
Juno just don't want to
get into that scene.
>From a selfish point of view, I'd love to see the product expand its customer
>base. I might have a
better chance of it providing me with an income if more people (and companies)
wanted to use
Euphoria. I keep hoping that one day I'll walk into a store and see Euphoria on
the front cover (and
CD) of PC and Linux magazines.
The current product has wide functionality, has good documentation, is stable,
and is well
supported. All of these things can be improved of course, but it is a very
"sellable" product right
now. I'm sure the path to a larger market will include a "make-over" to focus
less on the character-
based apps (MS-DOS and Linux), which are perceived as old-style, and more on the
GUI and Games apps.
To get into companies, it needs serious database and internet connectivity and
tools. By serious, I
mean either officially supported by RDS or by some solid organisation such as
Borland, Microsoft,
Oracle, or IBM.
----
Derek
14/11/2001 2:05:18 PM, Kat <gertie at PELL.NET> wrote:
>
>On 13 Nov 2001, at 22:20, rforno at tutopia.com wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree on the comments for the manual. It is a very good piece of work.
>> But what is really meant by a "shiny box"?
>
>It's almost just what it says: a shiney box! Shrink wrapped, fancy colors, like
>
>boxes that microsoft sells OSs in. The box is part of the advertising for the
>product.
>
>Kat
>
>
>> Maybe my English is not enough to
>> understand this idiomatic expression :). ----- Original Message ----- From:
>> <freeplay at mailandnews.com> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com> Sent:
>> Tuesday,
>> November 13, 2001 6:37 PM Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
>>
>>
>> > At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> > >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
>> > <snip>
>> > xxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
>> > already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb"
>> is
>> > a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
>> > with
>> > Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand and
>> > (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I
>> have
>> > ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe this
>> > is
>> > one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost) to
>> > translate the documentation to other languages.
>> >
>> > High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
>> > but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
>> >
>> > Keep up the good work all.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > FP.
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
14. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by euman at bellsouth.net
Nov 13, 2001
From: Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
> I can imagine that the "shiny box" can be a metaphor for placing the
product in more prominent
> position for consumers, as well as making it look attractive. The "box"
can be seen by the mass
> market if it is in shops; literally on the shelf.
>
> But the first question that RDS must ask itself is 'do we want to have a
huge market to support?'.
> If they don't, then they are going about it the right way now. If they do,
then they have to get
> into additional forms of product placement and marketing. This will bring
on new issues that one
> gets automatically when one has a large customer base - and maybe Robert
and Juno just don't want to
> get into that scene.
>
> >From a selfish point of view, I'd love to see the product expand its
customer base. I might have a
> better chance of it providing me with an income if more people (and
companies) wanted to use
> Euphoria. I keep hoping that one day I'll walk into a store and see
Euphoria on the front cover (and
> CD) of PC and Linux magazines.
>
> The current product has wide functionality, has good documentation, is
stable, and is well
> supported. All of these things can be improved of course, but it is a very
"sellable" product right
> now. I'm sure the path to a larger market will include a "make-over" to
focus less on the character-
> based apps (MS-DOS and Linux), which are perceived as old-style, and more
on the GUI and Games apps.
> To get into companies, it needs serious database and internet connectivity
and tools. By serious, I
> mean either officially supported by RDS or by some solid organisation such
as Borland, Microsoft,
> Oracle, or IBM.
>
> ----
> Derek
I too hope that Euphoria would hurry up and become more main stream....
I truly think Rob has the right idea releasing the code to the interpreter,
creating a two pass binder
"hopefully external for those who dont bind but Compile .. Hint to Rob
there!"
and making a move toward namespace.
Euphoria will be so easy now that we'll have that two pass, imagine never
again having to include
constants and defining c_func/procs by having one huge file that everyone
can feed off of. Huge + for me!
Derek, Jiri and many other Speed freaks >"just a pun, guys." that write
greatly optimized code and now that
we're going to have the source to Euphoria....look out world here comes
Euphoria... Huge + for RDS
Personally, having the source, the first thing Im going to attempt is a
thread library...
This is the only thing that I haven't worked out with API coding in Euphoria
for Win.
I really enjoy Euphoria, Thanks a bunch RDS...
Euman
euman at bellsouth.net
15. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Yes FP, yes & yes !!!
Documentation of Euphoria is wonderful,
and my native language is not English,
it is Russian. I had very large practice of
writing and editing of Russian naval/electronics
scientific texts (more than 10 years), and I can
say Euphoria's English documentation is crystal.
I understand it very well without translation
into Russian, in English as in my native language.
This is the very rare thing so clear and exact
expression of powerful programming ideas in
strongly concrete manual for strongly concrete
programming practice, and in very compact form.
This documentation is the *ideal* *instruction*.
But look for ideas in any instruction on OOP
and you'll find "the object is any thing, iron
or car or bread or ... for example. Just
remember for future".
Very clear for programmer, no ?
Just remember ... OK ... I'll rememmmber ...
I'mmmm very clever programmmer ... hmmmm ...
But C++'s and Java's manuals and books are
full of such the "ideas".
Yes, English Euphoria documentation is
so excellent that it is the very difficult
thing to corrupt this documentation
with translation into other languages
My Russian readers say: Russian docs are
clear and exact thank you Robert very much!
(But Rob says he doesn't understand
Russian at all, I do not believe to him,
but can not examine his Russian here
There was the printed manual in CE pakage
earlier, but any one can prepare such the
manual on his/her taste with the color
printer now, I think.
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
----------
> Îò: freeplay at mailandnews.com
> Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Òåìà: Re: Euphoria's Future?
> Äàòà: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 00:37
>
> At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
> <snip>
> >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
> <snip>
> xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
> already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb"
is
> a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
> with Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand
> and (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I
have
> ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe
this
> is one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost)
> to translate the documentation to other languages.
>
> High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
> but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
>
> Keep up the good work all.
>
> Regards,
>
> FP.
16. Re: Euphoria's Future?
OK Henry,
I know very well about sun-spots
and there is nothing *perfect* in the World
But who says that is pure Eu's blame, not W2k or NT ?
2.2 was before W2k, it seems, no ?
I have no W2k and NT, and what is the *standard...redirection"?
I read my manual on Win-95, there is...absolutelly nothing...
about any redirections...yes yes, my manual is Russian
localisation of MS firm docs. Yes, absolutelly nothing ...
And if Eu *can* then it is not *always must make and does make*,
just because of Eu is not a single program on your machine.
My enthusiasm is unshakeable and steadfast !
Best regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
----------
> Îò: Henri.Goffin at sbs.be
> Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Òåìà: RE: Euphoria's Future?
> Äàòà: Thursday, November 15, 2001 15:58
>
> Hi all!
>
> I'm sorry if I spoil a little bit the unlimited enthusiasm expressed so
far but Euphoria suffers from a least one severe limitation that I already
mentioned here.
>
> In the file bind.doc that comes with Euphoria 2.2 it is stated:
>
> " A bound executable file can handle standard input and output
redirection. e.g.
>
> myprog.exe < file.in > file.out"
>
> This is simply not true, at least on NT/W2K platforms. The reason is the
bound executable starts in a new console window that is unaware of the
invoking window's environment.
>
> There is also the problem of a memory violation error that I have with a
bound Euphoria program. The answer of Robert to my request for help was
rather disappointing because too reminescent of Microsoft's favorite silver
bullet: "reboot your system, maybe the problem will have disappeared". Who
would dare build his/her business on such a basis?
>
> To conclude with a positive remark I have to say that I will continue to
use Euphoria because it is a fine tool that has allowed me to write some
useful programs, even with a professional looking GUI, at a fraction of the
cost (in time and sweat and tears) that other languages (VB, C++, PERL,
JAVA,...) would no doubt have implied.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Henri Goffin
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Igor Kachan [SMTP:kinz at peterlink.ru]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 11:44 AM
> > To: EUforum
> > Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
> >
> >
> > Yes FP, yes & yes !!!
> >
> > Documentation of Euphoria is wonderful,
> > and my native language is not English,
> > it is Russian. I had very large practice of
> > writing and editing of Russian naval/electronics
> > scientific texts (more than 10 years), and I can
> > say Euphoria's English documentation is crystal.
> >
> > I understand it very well without translation
> > into Russian, in English as in my native language.
> >
> > This is the very rare thing so clear and exact
> > expression of powerful programming ideas in
> > strongly concrete manual for strongly concrete
> > programming practice, and in very compact form.
> >
> > This documentation is the *ideal* *instruction*.
> > But look for ideas in any instruction on OOP
> > and you'll find "the object is any thing, iron
> > or car or bread or ... for example. Just
> > remember for future".
> >
> > Very clear for programmer, no ?
> >
> > Just remember ... OK ... I'll rememmmber ...
> > I'mmmm very clever programmmer ... hmmmm ...
> >
> > But C++'s and Java's manuals and books are
> > full of such the "ideas".
> >
> > Yes, English Euphoria documentation is
> > so excellent that it is the very difficult
> > thing to corrupt this documentation
> > with translation into other languages
> >
> > My Russian readers say: Russian docs are
> > clear and exact thank you Robert very much!
> >
> > (But Rob says he doesn't understand
> > Russian at all, I do not believe to him,
> > but can not examine his Russian here
> >
> > There was the printed manual in CE pakage
> > earlier, but any one can prepare such the
> > manual on his/her taste with the color
> > printer now, I think.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Igor Kachan
> > kinz at peterlink.ru
> >
> > ----------
> > > > Îò: freeplay at mailandnews.com
> > > Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> > > Òåìà: Re: Euphoria's Future?
> > > Äàòà: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 00:37
> >
> > >
> > > At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
> > > <snip>
> > > xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because
it
> > > already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently
superb"
> > is
> > > a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is
supplied
> > > with Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to
understand
> > > and (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate
I>
> > have
> > > ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe
> > this
> > > is one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no
cost)
> > > to translate the documentation to other languages.
> > >
> > > High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's
success
> > > but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
> > >
> > > Keep up the good work all.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > FP.
17. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Henri Goffin writes:
> This is simply not true, at least on NT/W2K platforms.
> The reason is the bound executable starts in a new console
> window that is unaware of the invoking window's environment.
With the Euphoria source, you'll be able to build your
own exw.exe that is more console-oriented. It should work
with STDIN/STDOUT on any system. You just have to edit
one line in the .bat file that I'll distribute with it. Maybe I'll make a
version
like that myself and upload it once 2.3 alpha is out.
> There is also the problem of a memory violation error
> that I have with a bound Euphoria program. The answer of
> Robert to my request for help was rather disappointing because
> too reminescent of Microsoft's favorite silver bullet:
> "reboot your system, maybe the problem will have disappeared".
> Who would dare build his/her business on such a basis?
On Oct 5, 2001 I replied to you...
R> In 2.3 the interpreter will have trace(3) which will allow you
R> to log the exact Euphoria statement that was being executed
R> when a machine-level crash like this occurred.
R> Until then, you can insert print statements to pin down
R> where the crash happens.
Did you insert any print statements?
If not, wait 10 days or so until trace(3) is available.
You'll also be able to try the new 2-pass binder,
although I doubt that a binding bug is the
root cause of your problems.
>From my experience these cases usually turn out
to be a bug in the application that only shows up
when it's bound (or it's Tuesday afternoon, or there's
unusual sunspot activity, or ...)
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
18. Re: Euphoria's Future?
<color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>Hi all!
I could only read it, seat and stay right where I am but I think
there's more than just second every good word (as these from Derek)
and blame some that I'll keep to myself. Well, I won't. I do agree
that Euphoria is a great language, great product, easy, powerful,
what else. Ok, it has some lacks but it will be improved. It's
getting better all the time... like the music!
Now, back to the real world (and not just to this list), Euphoria
has a need to be spread all over, quickly. Talking to Travis Beaty
once, I told him that I didn't found a single book about Euphoria.
I really don't need them that much, but some people do, very badly.
You know what? These people will learn VB, Delphi, Perl, Python,
AWK, what else, because they can find books about each one of these
languages, either in English or (many cases) on their own language.
Fortunately, seems that Travis will write a book about Euphoria
soon and I truly hope that it could become a reference to the
language. He already did a fantastic job: "The Encyclopaedia" in
winhelp format. All Euphoria manuals plus those from major
libraries, packed in one single searchable file, is a must! I'm
trying to translate it to my home language to make Euphoria
accessible to non-English speaking people of my country that also
do some programming. It’s a lot of work but it’ll be out some
day...
Do you want to know my humbly opinion? Books! Books are what we
need most. The only tool to remove mists and myths over Euphoria.
Let's take it to the common mortals.
Have a nice day!
-- Euler<bigger> German
<smaller>On 14 Nov 2001, at 15:13, Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> I can imagine that the "shiny box" can be a metaphor for placing
> the product in more prominent position for consumers, as well as
> making it look attractive. The "box" can be seen by the mass
> market if it is in shops; literally on the shelf.
>
> But the first question that RDS must ask itself is 'do we want
> to have a huge market to support?'. If they don't, then they are
> going about it the right way now. If they do, then they have to
> get into additional forms of product placement and marketing.
> This will bring on new issues that one gets automatically when
> one has a large customer base - and maybe Robert and Juno just
> don't want to get into that scene.
>
> From a selfish point of view, I'd love to see the product
> expand its customer base. I might have a better chance of it
> providing me with an income if more people (and companies)
> wanted to use Euphoria. I keep hoping that one day I'll walk
> into a store and see Euphoria on the front cover (and CD) of PC
> and Linux magazines.
>
> The current product has wide functionality, has good
> documentation, is stable, and is well supported. All of these
> things can be improved of course, but it is a very "sellable"
> product right now. I'm sure the path to a larger market will
> include a "make-over" to focus less on the character- based apps
> (MS-DOS and Linux), which are perceived as old-style, and more
> on the GUI and Games apps. To get into companies, it needs
> serious database and internet connectivity and tools. By
> serious, I mean either officially supported by RDS or by some
> solid organisation such as Borland, Microsoft, Oracle, or IBM.
>
> ----
> Derek
>
> 14/11/2001 2:05:18 PM, Kat <<gertie at PELL.NET> wrote:
>
> >
> >On 13 Nov 2001, at 22:20, rforno at tutopia.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I agree on the comments for the manual. It is a very good piece of work.
> >> But what is really meant by a "shiny box"?
> >
> >It's almost just what it says: a shiney box! Shrink wrapped, fancy colors,
> >like
> >boxes that microsoft sells OSs in. The box is part of the advertising for the
> >
> >product.
> >
> >Kat
> >
> >
> >> Maybe my English is not enough to
> >> understand this idiomatic expression :). ----- Original Message ----- From:
> >> <<freeplay at mailandnews.com> To: "EUforum" <<EUforum at topica.com> Sent:
> >> Tuesday,
> >> November 13, 2001 6:37 PM Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
> >>
> >>
> >> > At 09:10 13/11/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >> > <<snip>
> >> > >It needs a shiny box and a good manual.
> >> > <<snip>
> >> > xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >
> >> > I disagree on one point. Euphoria doesn't need a good manual because it
> >> > already comes with one far far better than "good" - "excellently superb"
> >> is
> >> > a better description. The documentation (i.e. "manual") that is supplied
> >> > with
> >> > Euphoria is the best example of clearly written, easy to understand and
> >> > (thanks to the hot link ability of HTML) the easiest to navigate I
> >> have
> >> > ever come across in twenty years of reading such material. I believe
> >> > this is
> >> > one of the reasons why so many people have taken the time (at no cost) to
> >> > translate the documentation to other languages.
> >> >
> >> > High quality documentation for any product is essential for it's success
> >> > but a shiny box to put it in is, IMHO, not
> >> >
> >> > Keep up the good work all.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> >
> >> > FP.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> This email was sent to: efgerman at myrealbox.com
>
> Or send an email to: EUforum-unsubscribe at topica.com
>
>
>
19. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hello All!
> Fortunately, seems that Travis will write a book about Euphoria soon and I
> truly hope that it
> could become a reference to the language. He already did a fantastic job:
> "The Encyclopaedia"
> in winhelp format. All Euphoria manuals plus those from major libraries,
> packed in one single
> searchable file, is a must! I'm trying to translate it to my home language to
> make Euphoria
> accessible to non-English speaking people of my country that also do some
> programming. It’s
> a lot of work but it’ll be out some day...
<yelp_with_smile>Euler! You let out my secret!</yelp_with_smile> hehehehe
Okay ... let me set the record a little straighter on this one. I am planning
on writing a book on
Euphoria: however, don't expect it to be available for quite a while. I am
still hammering on the
new installer code, and that is the top priority at this moment (other than
those useless things
like working and getting money, and other meaningless endeavors). It is
basically an
outcropping of my "Encyclopaedia Euphoria" project, which met with so-so
enthusiasm.
Besides, I can't really write a lot on it until Euphoria 2.3 -- at least the
alpha -- is out and I have
base documentation for namespaces and other added features. And, since I'll be
trying to
provide the very documentation spoken of, there will be a lot of research to do
with the respective
library authors. As in, "If I code in click_ruby_slippers() three times in a
row, will my program
end up in Kansas?"
Travis Beaty
Evans, Colorado.
20. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Jerry Story wrote:
> Here's my excuse to bring up the subject of gtk.e,
> a library started by David Cuny but not finished. This
> library is (I guess) mainly for the linux world but is
> (I guess) supposed to be cross-platform.
My personal preference would be to use wxWindows:
http://www.wxwindows.org
I've already written a set 'generic' wrappers that can be used to glue
wxWindows to C/C++ scripting languages. As a sort of 'proof of concept', I'm
using them in my own Basic interpeter:
http://wxbasic.sourceforge.net
Ironically, I started out the project writing wrappers for Euphoria, but
since the source wasn't available, I had to set up my own test platform.
That 'test platform' eventually turned into wxBasic.
The wrappers have even been used by someone else to create a wxWindows
enabled version of the Lua.
Once Robert releases Euphoria, I'll trying creating a wxWindows enabled
version of Euphoria.
-- David Cuny
21. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 15 Nov 2001, at 21:40, Travis Beaty wrote:
>
> <yelp_with_smile>Euler! You let out my secret!</yelp_with_smile> hehehehe
>
Good grief! I did know that it should be a secret! Sorry for
turning lights on before door opening... hehe.
BTW, did you set up your PDS site already? Let us know. Soon,
please!
Cheers!
--Euler
(Over here is 4:30AM now! I just dunno how my wife can stand me...)
22. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 15 Nov 2001, at 22:11, David Cuny wrote:
>
> Jerry Story wrote:
>
> > Here's my excuse to bring up the subject of gtk.e,
> > a library started by David Cuny but not finished. This
> > library is (I guess) mainly for the linux world but is
> > (I guess) supposed to be cross-platform.
>
> My personal preference would be to use wxWindows:
>
> http://www.wxwindows.org
>
> I've already written a set 'generic' wrappers that can be used to glue
> wxWindows to C/C++ scripting languages. As a sort of 'proof of concept', I'm
> using them in my own Basic interpeter:
>
> http://wxbasic.sourceforge.net
But to run wxbasic, we must replace the task manager in windose with
wxwindows? The wxwindows site says the api calls for *nix are different than
for windoze, so we still have the non-portable programs. What i was thinking
was being able to write an Eu program on my win95, and then upload to a
shell server running *nix, and it works. I still see no way to do it.
Kat
23. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Kat wrote:
> But to run wxbasic, we must replace the task manager
> in windose with wxwindows?
No.
> The wxwindows site says the api calls for *nix are
> different than for windoze, so we still have the
> non-portable programs.
I'm not sure what you were on the site looking at. The wxWindows API is
portable across Windows, *nix and Mac platforms. Certain features (like
ODBC) are by their nature non-portable, but the vast majority of the
wxWindows API is portable.
Is there a specific part of the API you are referring to?
> What i was thinking was being able to write an Eu
> program on my win95, and then upload to a shell
> server running *nix, and it works. I still see no
> way to do it.
Urm... I can take the programs that I've written in wxBasic and run them
either under the Windows or Linux versions. There are occasional
differences, but for the most part, these are minor and easy to fix.
-- David Cuny
24. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 16 Nov 2001, at 8:08, David Cuny wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > But to run wxbasic, we must replace the task manager
> > in windose with wxwindows?
>
> No.
>
>
> > The wxwindows site says the api calls for *nix are
> > different than for windoze, so we still have the
> > non-portable programs.
>
> I'm not sure what you were on the site looking at. The wxWindows API is
> portable across Windows, *nix and Mac platforms. Certain features (like
> ODBC) are by their nature non-portable, but the vast majority of the
> wxWindows API is portable.
>
> Is there a specific part of the API you are referring to?
Since the non-portable calls were not named, i was looking at them as un-
named gotchas.
> > What i was thinking was being able to write an Eu
> > program on my win95, and then upload to a shell
> > server running *nix, and it works. I still see no
> > way to do it.
>
> Urm... I can take the programs that I've written in wxBasic and run them
> either under the Windows or Linux versions. There are occasional
> differences, but for the most part, these are minor and easy to fix.
But you are making calls to the API of wxwindows, not to the OS's API.
Where is the wxwindows in the scheme of things, imbedded in your
wxBasic, or a dll on my machine, or ?
Kat
25. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Nov 16, 2001
Were the planets properly aligned?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Craig" <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
>
> Henri Goffin writes:
> > This is simply not true, at least on NT/W2K platforms.
> > The reason is the bound executable starts in a new console
> > window that is unaware of the invoking window's environment.
>
> With the Euphoria source, you'll be able to build your
> own exw.exe that is more console-oriented. It should work
> with STDIN/STDOUT on any system. You just have to edit
> one line in the .bat file that I'll distribute with it. Maybe I'll make a
version
> like that myself and upload it once 2.3 alpha is out.
>
> > There is also the problem of a memory violation error
> > that I have with a bound Euphoria program. The answer of
> > Robert to my request for help was rather disappointing because
> > too reminescent of Microsoft's favorite silver bullet:
> > "reboot your system, maybe the problem will have disappeared".
> > Who would dare build his/her business on such a basis?
>
> On Oct 5, 2001 I replied to you...
>
> R> In 2.3 the interpreter will have trace(3) which will allow you
> R> to log the exact Euphoria statement that was being executed
> R> when a machine-level crash like this occurred.
>
> R> Until then, you can insert print statements to pin down
> R> where the crash happens.
>
> Did you insert any print statements?
> If not, wait 10 days or so until trace(3) is available.
> You'll also be able to try the new 2-pass binder,
> although I doubt that a binding bug is the
> root cause of your problems.
> >From my experience these cases usually turn out
> to be a bug in the application that only shows up
> when it's bound (or it's Tuesday afternoon, or there's
> unusual sunspot activity, or ...)
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>
>
>
>
26. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by missmanp at cfw.com
Nov 16, 2001
Does the POSIX interface under NT meat the criteria of the API? If so, was
that same POSIX interface included in Windows XP, or even in other members
of the Windows family?
Just a thought.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kat" <gertie at PELL.NET>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Euphoria's Future?
>
> But to run wxbasic, we must replace the task manager in windose with
> wxwindows? The wxwindows site says the api calls for *nix are different
than
> for windoze, so we still have the non-portable programs. What i was
thinking
> was being able to write an Eu program on my win95, and then upload to a
> shell server running *nix, and it works. I still see no way to do it.
>
> Kat
27. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Kat wrote:
>> Is there a specific part of the API you are referring to?
>
> Since the non-portable calls were not named, i was looking
> at them as un-named gotchas.
I asked that poorly. Where on the wxWindows site did it talk about the API
being non-portable?
> But you are making calls to the API of wxwindows, not to the
> OS's API. Where is the wxwindows in the scheme of things,
> imbedded in your wxBasic, or a dll on my machine, or ?
Well, on a conceptual level, wxWindows attempts to map calls to the native
API. So on Windows, it creates native controls (where possible), calls
Windows system functions, etc. On Linux, it calls GTK/Motif (it can support
both libraries, but the Motif port is apparently quite rusty) for the GUI,
and the underlying OS for most of the other stuff.
You can either statically bind the wxWindows library to your executable
(which makes a larger executable) or create a dynamic DLL that goes along
with your application.
Did that answer the question? I'm not sure where there's confusion.
-- David Cuny
28. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hello all!
> BTW, did you set up your PDS site already? Let us know. Soon,
> please!
I try to make a post about that a couple of days ago, but unfortunately, it does
not appear to
have made it through. (hehehe I've learned to quit getting so anal about that.
hehehe)
Apparently, my site was summarily removed from ProHosting because they found
something in
my website to be inappropriate. As far as what it was that was "inappropriate,"
I have no clue,
other than the fact that I had to audacity to quote both the Bible and the Koran
on the same
page in my personal section.
For the last month or so, most of my energy has gone into getting established
here. This has
been accomplished, so now things will begin to return to normal with me. So, in
the next couple
of days, I will start shopping around for some space on a local ISP here ... for
all intents and
purposes, I'm in the Denver metro area. Once that is done, I'll pay/send/fax
the money and
upload the PDS site there. The show (as far as the website is concerned) should
be up and
running within a week or so.
Also ... by the end of the weekend, I'll have a prototype for the scripting
language that will be
used in the Euphoria Package Manager. It is currently beginning to gel on
notebook paper --
once it is solidified, I'll scrape it off and send to the list to see what y'all
think. Once I have a
good idea what the language syntax will be, I'll build the EPM compiler, and
once I have EPM
files, I'll rebuild the installer to handle them.
Travis Beaty
Evans, Colorado
29. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Ray Smith wrote:
> What is the future or wxBasic?? What are your
> "current" aims for developing wxBasic??
There are two parts to wxBasic - the Basic interpreter, and the wxWindows
wrappers. Each part is actually independant of each other.
I plan on continuing work on both in the forseeable future. One of the
reasons for releasing it on SourceForge was to get more visibility for the
project. I've been trying to find someone willing to help with a Mac port
(wxWindows runs under the Classic Mac OS and OS X), but so far without any
luck.
> Is your aim to develop a cross platform Visual Basic
> "type" environment?
No, for the moment I'm happy with text-based development. Maybe some time
later I'll consider an IDE. Robin Dunn is in the process of wrapping the
ScITE editor - which supports lots of cool features, like syntax coloring -
into wxWindows. That will be a cool addition for any IDE.
> You also mentioned you would/might add your wx
> wrappers to Euphoria when the Euphoria source is
> available. What incentive is there to do that if
> you have your own interpreter?
I'll certainly attempt it. Not having seen the Euphoria source, I can't
predict how successful I will be.
This whole project started out as an attempt to provide Euphoria with a
cross-platform library. I've been advocating it for some time, and when I
started writing the wxWindows wrappers, I needed *something* to code to.
wxBasic was sort of a stand-in, and it became a project in it's own right.
I've actually written my own version of the Euphoria sequence library, but
it's not especially fun code. Garbage collection permeates everything you
do, and it's unlikely that someone would actually work on the code other
than me. So there's not a lot of point in taking that route.
Plus, if the port goes well, I hope to convince Robert that releasing a
wxWindows enabled version of Euphoria would be a good thing for his
pocketbook. Time will tell.
> How difficult would it be to remove the wxWindows
> logic from the source code and produce a "simple"
> basic interpreter?
As the documentation points out, just compile core.c:
gcc core.c -owxbasic.exe
> Following on from that, how difficult would it be
> to plug in other libraries (like Allegro games library,
> FLTK GUI Library, Fox GUI library for examples) into
> your basic interpreter?
Stuff like Allegro is fairly straight-forward to wrap, because it's a C
toolkit. C++ toolkits are more problematic to wrap.
FTLK and Fox are both C++ toolkits. Not all the other toolkits allow dynamic
creation of controls and assignment of callback at runtime - I vaguely
recall one of those as having that limitation.
Additionally, both FLTK and Fox are emulate controls, rather than use native
controls on their platform. This is - In My Not So Humble Opinion - less
than ideal. Besides, an emulated toolkit version of wxWindows (wxUniversal)
it also availble, currently in alpha stage. So I don't see any of those
toolkits as especially interesting.
The code that I have for wrapping C++ code could probably be adapted for
other libraries, but given the above issues, I don't see any need to do
that.
> How has the response been from the wxWindows community
> regarding wxBasic?
Not enough to make me want to give up my day job.
Most of the people are C++ coders, so it's not a solution to any problem
they are facing. Calling it pre-alpha probably doesn't help attract people,
either. People who have stumbled on it 'by accident' are pretty positive
about it.
There are a lot of versions of Basic out there, and wxBasic is a fairly
niche sort of thing. Not everyone is interested in cross-platform
capabilities.
Personally, being able to write something like the Minesweeper demo in
Windows, and then have it run with no modification under Linux is Very Cool.
> Does wxBasic have any limitations?
Lots of them, look at shared.h for some of the constants. The documentation
talks about some of them.
It's also given me a lot of ideas I'd like to try out with Euphoria. I think
the release of the Euphoria source code could prove *very* interesting. It
will be interesting to see how difficult it is to change Euphoria's
behavior. For example, I've been itching to add Jiri's associative lists to
Euphoria.
If you have more wxBasic questions, feel free to ask me... Off the Euphoria
mailing list, though.
Thanks.
-- David Cuny
30. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hi Henri,
----------
> Îò: Henri.Goffin at sbs.be
> Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Òåìà: RE: Euphoria's Future?
> Äàòà: Monday, November 19, 2001 16:29
<snip>
>my prog crashes before executing the first statement.
>Probably during the init phase
>(heap allocation or something).
</snip>
Try please:
--- just the top of your prog
puts(1,"1\n")
while get_key()=-1 do end while
-- the first your old statement
include your_lib1.e -- just the first include
puts(1,"2\n")
while get_key()=-1 do end while
include your_lib2.e -- just the second include
---- and so on
If you see 1, push any key to go to the next statement,
if you see 2, push any key to go to the next statement.
and so on ...
If it crashes on the 1st include then place in the 1st
include on the top:
puts(1,"1-1\n")
while get_key()=-1 do end while
and so on ....
This method is the most powerful debugger.
Try please, maybe the thing is not so sad ...
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
31. Re: Euphoria's Future?
- Posted by euman at bellsouth.net
Nov 19, 2001
I have done this very many times, leave the A off of a define_c_func
indicating
that its ANSI-ASCII instead of Unicode...and the program not work..
Al Getz has a WinTrace module up on the EUCP.
Euman
euman at bellsouth.net
32. Re: Euphoria's Future?
On 19 Nov 2001, at 0:07, David Cuny wrote:
>
> If you have more wxBasic questions, feel free to ask me... Off the Euphoria
> mailing list, though.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- David Cuny
>
Oh, please don't! Though it might be seen as improper, it sure will
bring us a different point of view. Comparing is the easiest way to
pinpoint weaknesses and strengths. It can lead us to a better
synthesis.
Have a nice week!
-- Euler
33. Re: Euphoria's Future?
Hi Henri,
----------
> Îò: Henri.Goffin at sbs.be
> Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Òåìà: RE: Euphoria's Future?
> Äàòà: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:29
<snip>
> But basically the problem is still potentially
> there because your method did not allow me to
> pinpoint one particular include.
</snip>
Try please:
----top of your prog
global procedure b_(integer n)
? n
while get_key()=-1 do end while
end procedure
b_(1)
include f1.e -- your 1st include
b_(2)
include f2.e -- your 2nd include
b_(3)
include f3.e -- your 3rd include
--
-- code
--
----bottom of your prog
----top of include f1.e
b_(11)
---- code
b_(12)
---- code
b_(13)
----and so on
----bottom of include f1.e
---- top of include f2.e
b_(21)
---- code
b_(22)
---- code
b_(23)
---- and so on
----bottom of include f1.e
And so on
You can "trace" with these b_() all your includes,
when the ORDER of includes is *buggy*.
> It seems to indicate there are include sequences
> that are endowed with dark powers!
> Maybe when they reproduce the pattern of some
> ancient runes!!!
>
> Strange, isn't it??? (insert X-files theme here :-0)
I have traced new win32lib.ew with this
method and it shows my comctl32.dll is obsolete,
exactly as one of the list's experts pointed.
Try please once more, maybe things are not
so strange and romantic
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
