1. Re: crash_message
Roderick Jackson wrote:
> But Euphoria *isn't* one of those languages. That's
> the whole point, one of the things that makes it unique.
> It embraces the 'it can be abused' viewpoint quite
> thoroughly.
I think this 'it can be abused' thread misses the point. The more important
question is: 'Does it provide a useful functionality that can't be achieved
with the current features in the language?' The answer is 'Yes.'
> Consider...
I consider the lack of forward references and routine_id scoping to be
design flaws. I hope that Robert will reconsider these.
> No offense Ralf, but you seem to dislike all (or most)
> of the above positive benefits of Euphoria. Why do you
> even use it?
I picked Euphoria for the following reasons:
- QBasic was limited in memory
- It's interpreted
- It was easy to learn
- It's similar enough to C to pick up easily
None of the reasons you listed were on my list, yet I continue to code in
Euphoria.
-- David Cuny
