1. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Patrick Barnes wrote:
>
>
> Chris, I assure you the flame wars will start up again as soon as
> we've finished this contest. My energies are too busy trying to
> optimise things right now.
>
> --
> MrTrick
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.
>
By the time the contest is over, 2.5 will likely be out. And Robert will
have bought himself another year to 'wait out the storms' yet again.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
2. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Chris Bensler wrote:
>
>
> Patrick Barnes wrote:
> >
> >
> > Chris, I assure you the flame wars will start up again as soon as
> > we've finished this contest. My energies are too busy trying to
> > optimise things right now.
> >
> > --
> > MrTrick
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.
> >
>
> By the time the contest is over, 2.5 will likely be out. And Robert will
> have bought himself another year to 'wait out the storms' yet again.
>
Eu has its problems, but what doesn't? Where is the alternative language that
has no "issues"? I recognize that Euphoria will not be my solution *forever*,
possibly due to the rather slow rate of growth that you complain about, but at
the moment I literally make my living using the tools that I developed in
Euphoria -- tools that would be much more difficult in other languages. And the
day 2.5 comes out, I will *happily* and *gratefully* register both the
interpreter, translator, & source code. Euphoria has given me a hell of a lot --
I've given Rob a grand total of $30 or so for a registered translator. I want
Euphoria to improve, but my main feeling about it is gratitude...
3. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Chris Bensler wrote:
>
>
> > >At the very least, it seems to have
> > > stopped the various flame wars that were going on...
>
> > And people call me mad 
It also gives a break to RDS - I'm anxious
> > for v2.5 and Robert doesn't need to many problems just now.
>
> That is extremely dissapointing to hear.
> It's submissive attitudes like that, which allows RapidEuphoria to
> continue with their deceptive tactics of 'waiting out the storm'.
> That's dispicable, on both the part of Robert and on the part of people
> who I would normally consider better than that.
[big snip]
> Chris Bensler
> Code is Alchemy
Hi Chris,
It's great to know you have passion for helping improve Euphoria but I'm=
not sure posts like this help your cause.
Subtlety isn't your trump card is it! :)
I've been big on dishing out the dirt on Euphoria for many years ... but=
*I think* I have also started my posts with something like ...
"RDS own Euphoria and are 100% entitled to do whatever they want with it=
=85 " and this still stands true. RDS are under no financial or moral
obligation to do anything which they haven=92t specifically committed
themselves to. (The only thing I can think of is to provide free
support for X months after registration?)
I have written this so many times it must be becoming monotonous to
everyone (and me!) ...
=93If Euphoria can=92t do what you want it to do *now* =85 then Euphoria is=
n=92t=20
the correct tool for *you* because it ain=92t changing!=94
=93If Euphoria *is* doing what you want it to do now =85 great!=94
Everyone has a choice ... they can:
1. Use Euphoria, or
2. Not use Euphoria.
Myself, and what seems like alot of people in the past have decided on
option 2.
Regards,=20
Ray Smith
http://rays-web.com
4. RE: The fate of Euphoria
I apologize to Derek and Phil for seemingly targetting them. That wasn't
my intention, but I used you as examples.
I realize that everyone isn't as adamant as I am, but those statements I
quoted reflected, for one, disregard, and also discouragement of those
who will demand or even request resolution.
I beleive it's vital that we keep pushing RDS forcefully to make the
right changes.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
5. RE: The fate of Euphoria
On 5 Nov 2004, at 5:02, Ray Smith wrote:
<snip>
> =93If Euphoria can=92t do what you want it to do *now* =85 then Euphoria is=
> n=92t=20 the correct tool for *you* because it ain=92t changing!=94
>
> =93If Euphoria *is* doing what you want it to do now =85 great!=94
What?
Kat
6. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Andy Serpa wrote:
<SNIP>
> Eu has its problems, but what doesn't? Where is the alternative
> language that has no "issues"? I recognize that Euphoria will not
> be my solution *forever*, possibly due to the rather slow rate of
> growth that you complain about, but at the moment I literally make
> my living using the tools that I developed in Euphoria -- tools
> that would be much more difficult in other languages. And the day
> 2.5 comes out, I will *happily* and *gratefully* register both the
> interpreter, translator, & source code. Euphoria has given me a
> hell of a lot -- I've given Rob a grand total of $30 or so for a
> registered translator. I want Euphoria to improve, but my main
> feeling about it is gratitude...
It's not the fact that Euphoria has it's issues. As you said, every
language does. The difference is that most other authors will try to
meet the demands of it's users. Not try to make the users meet the
demands of the language.
I would gladly pay $100's for Euphoria if I felt that Euphoria was an
acceptable solution to even general programming problems.
Currently, it is not. It struggles to be anything better than a hobbiest
language, or a learning tool. Only with considerable effort is it
possible to create anything significant with Euphoria.
Or else be satified to use Euphoria only for small tasks, and take up
other languages like C or D. That's more than unfortunate, that is
discouraging. Why should I even bother with Euphoria then? Why not just
use C? I can get C for free too.
I used to be grateful, now I'm just disappointed that I supported RDS
and insulted by his obvious lack of action.
It almost all comes down to business tactics I think. Rob plays a very
good politician. If Rob would publicize his intentions, then I would
accept them, knowing in advance what I've got myself into. As it is, he
is selling time shares for Florida swampland, if you get what I mean.
Despite what you may think, my offensive position originates from trying
to actually help RDS. Which is all the more reason why I am so
disgruntled. I can't even HELP him, because Rob won't allow it.
I can't even volunteer to help him. The best I can do, is do my own
thing, and hope he likes it, and adopts it. That's a hell of alot of
work for a chance of slim to none. I've spent 100's, maybe 1000's of
man-hours trying to assist RDS against their best efforts to deter me.
The question of $30 is trivial in comparison to that.
I tried being an advocate for quite a few years, and it was definitely
ineffective. Promoting RDS to continue with their tunnel vision is not
just detrimental to myself, but unfair to others who are not yet aware
of the pending problems of Euphoria.
Of course I could just abandon Euphoria, but as I've said many times, I
LIKE Euphoria, but I also beleive it could be alot better.
I beleive Euphoria has the potential to be one of the best high-level
languages available, given the opportunity.
I could also just accept Eu for what it is, but I beleive that is a huge
disservice to Euphoria and it's users in general.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
7. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Ray Smith wrote:
<SNIP>
> [big snip]
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> It's great to know you have passion for helping improve Euphoria but
> I'm=
>
> not sure posts like this help your cause.
> Subtlety isn't your trump card is it! :)
No it isn't :)
I'm not concerned if people like me or not.
I am concerned that Euphoria has the potential to be superior to
practically any other language in it's class, yet hardly anyone,
especially RDS, wants to persue that.
<SNIP>
> =85 " and this still stands true. RDS are under no financial or
> moral=20
> obligation to do anything which they haven=92t specifically committed
> themselves to. (The only thing I can think of is to provide free
> support for X months after registration?)
You are right Ray, but what has RDS committed to? They have absolutley
no action plan, other than the brief warning about the new features he
WILL be implementing, not that is being considered.
<SNIP>
> Everyone has a choice ... they can:
> 1. Use Euphoria, or
> 2. Not use Euphoria.
>
> Myself, and what seems like alot of people in the past have decided
> on=20
> option 2.
>
> Regards,=20
>
> Ray Smith
> http://rays-web.com
>
There are specific reasons why I use Euphoria, and why I like it.
No other languages offer what I am looking for.
Euphoria's syntax is rivalled by virtually no other.
Euphoria is also interpreted, that is a trait I value highly.
Euphoria is also a very clean and concise language in it's
implementation, not just syntax. On one hand I condemn RDS for being so
cautious. On the other, I commend them for being able to create such
poetry. That is a feat that can only be accomplished by being strict.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
8. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Chris Bensler wrote:
...
> Of course I could just abandon Euphoria, but as I've said many times, I
> LIKE Euphoria, but I also beleive it could be alot better.
> I beleive Euphoria has the potential to be one of the best high-level
> languages available, given the opportunity.
Euphoria has the potential - but RDS doesn't, in my opinion.
They have the knowledge, but no vision whatsoever.
Maybe you would like to join me in helping Marc Krisnanto with the Qu
language, which already has many of the things people have been requesting
here (in vain) for years. He's working alone, and could probably use some
help.
Since this is RDS' list, I won't mention Qu again. You can check my
webpage in a couple of days for more info.
Regards,
Irv
http://ellijay.com/users/irvm/
9. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
Chris Bensler wrote:
> I would gladly pay $100's for Euphoria if I felt that Euphoria was an
> acceptable solution to even general programming problems.
> Currently, it is not. It struggles to be anything better than a hobbiest
> language, or a learning tool. Only with considerable effort is it
> possible to create anything significant with Euphoria.
I guess it depends on what you consider "significant". The thing I like about
Euphoria most is that I can do "significant" things *without* considerable effort
-- I spend my time thinking about algorithms in general rather than coding quirks
or language specifics. Like I said, I am now making my living using absolutely
tools that I developed in Euphoria -- absolutely cutting-edge state-of-the-art AI
data analysis programs. And they are in 100% Euphoria, and rather trivial to
code (although they would have been much tougher without the existence of Mike
Nelson's Diamond). That is quite significant to me. I am also now running
several websites that are 100% powered by Euphoria (not the server itself, but Eu
generates all the pages dynamically). I administer a database of over 2.5
Gigabytes with a Euphora front-end and query engine (db engine is Berkely DB). I
have not run into a problem yet that I couldn't solve with Euphoria (sometimes
with the help of a third-party .dll). Often, when I tackle a new problem --
something I've never even thought about before -- I'm amazed that I can have a
workable "rough draft" solution within an hour or two and not very many lines of
code. I've looked at lots of other languages and haven't found one yet where
everything is so easy and yet I can produce programs of such power & flexibility.
As we've said, it has issues like anything, but the bottom line is that I would
be using something else if I couldn't do what I wanted with Euphoria.
Apparently, you haven't found anything else that will do what you want either or
else you wouldn't be here trying to push reforms. And there is an Eu open-source
movement and v2.5 with its Eu front-end sounds highly "hackable" which is why I
will be registering the source code this time around. The easiest solution is to
simply implement your own improvements, and you don't have to worry too much
about what Rob is going to do. If Rob dropped dead today and Euphoria was
"locked" forever I expect I would still find it quite useful for the next several
years at least...
10. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by "Ricardo M. Forno" <rforno at uyuyuy.com>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Haberek <ghaberek at gmail.com>
To: <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: The fate of Euphoria
>
> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 02:29:42 +0000, Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net> wrote:
> >
> > > >At the very least, it seems to have
> > > > stopped the various flame wars that were going on...
> >
> > > And people call me mad It also gives a break to RDS - I'm anxious
> > > for v2.5 and Robert doesn't need to many problems just now.
> >
> > That is extremely dissapointing to hear.
> > It's submissive attitudes like that, which allows RapidEuphoria to
> > continue with their deceptive tactics of 'waiting out the storm'.
> > That's dispicable, on both the part of Robert and on the part of people
> > who I would normally consider better than that.
> >
> > It's not a wonder that Robert Craig never listens to his patrons. Why
> > should he? All he has to do, is keep quiet for a while, and you guys
> > give up. Pathetic.
> >
> > You know, he never did respond to the include statement issue just as I
> > said, other than to basically say it's not going to be fixed.
> > You think that is acceptible?!?
> >
> > And you are looking forward to giving him MORE money so you can further
> > enforce his behaviour of complete and utter disregard?
> > Shame on all of you!
> >
> > It's no wonder I'm so hostile on here. I refuse to accept his behaviour,
> > and you guys are just as ignorant as he is.
> > You know the problems exist, yet you refuse to admit that they are
> > there.
> >
> > I commend you Derek for your efforts with the contest, and general
> > community support. But of all people, you know the issues better than I
> > do, and set an example for most everyone in the euphoria community. You
> > should be more assertive of your opinions.
> >
> > I'm sure you realize that your ignorance perpetuates the problems of
> > euphoria onto not only existing Euphoria users, but all prospective
> > users as well. You should also realize that silence is perceived as
> > satisfaction.
> >
> > It's pretty hard to deny that significant issues exist with Euphoria,
> > and are NOT BEING ADDRESSED. You would rather sweep it under the rug,
> > and let Robert get away with it!
> >
> > I will continue fighting tooth and nail, because I feel we are being
> > BETRAYED by Rapid Deployment Software.
> >
> > I remember how many years I have spent learning euphoria, only to be
> > extremely dissapointed with RDS. The very least I can do with my
> > experience, is make sure others, especially new users, know of the
> > problems with euphoria.
> >
> > For what reason does Robert Craig have, to improve Euporia, other than
> > to milk more money from us? He certainly doesn't have to address the
> > problems. The Euphoria community demonstrates extreme lethargy, and
> > furthermore even promotes Rob's behaviour!
> >
> > How can you make him accountable, if you won't express your opinions?
> > How can you justify deceiving new and existing Euphoria users who are
> > legitamately unaware of Euphoria's issues, by being silent?
> > I consider that kind of silence to be anti-productive and even selfish.
> >
> > I'm more dissapointed with the lack of activism within the community
> > than I am with Rob. Particularly knowledgable people like Phil, and
> > Derek, who certainly know of Euphoria's, and more specifically, RDS's
> > failings.
> >
> > I am at the point, where I feel it would be better if Euphoria just
> > ceased development and withered quickly, instead of the slow and
> > tortuous lack of progress which is inevitably going to end in tragedy
> > anyways.
> >
> > I refuse to give up, if not for my benefit, then for the benefit of
> > others, and the fate of Euphoria.
> >
> > Chris Bensler
> > Code is Alchemy
>
> Please excuse me for using weird analogies here. I'm a hobbyist
> programmer as well as a hobbyist mechanic.
>
> <analogy Civic=Euphoria Honda=RDS>
> Let's say I need a car. My basic requirements are price and
> reliability. So I go out and buy a Honda Civic. Its an average-priced
> economy car that will get me from A to B without a fuss.
>
> But after I've been using my Honda Civic, I decide its not fast
> enough. And I want power windows. And a CD player. And a GOTO syntax
> (oops, sorry, wrong car).
>
> Now I have three choices: I can either (A) continue to use my Honda
> Civic the way I bought it because there's nothing wrong with how it
> works and it does what I need it to do, (B) modify my Honda Civic to
> accomodate my needs, which is perfectly reasonable if I have the
> proper knowledge, or (C) I go buy another car that suits my new needs.
>
> I do not (D) call Honda and throw a fit beacuse *their* Civic doesn't
> meet all my needs, or (E) complain to other Civic owners who are
> perfectly happy with their Civics because I'm not happy with mine.
>
> If I'm patient enough, I can (F) call Honda and request they make the
> Civic a bit faster, and make power windows and a CD player standard,
> but I have to remember that it IS THEIR CIVIC! They make it and if
> they don't want to put in an option for any reason, that's their
> choice.
> </analogy>
>
> Stick that in your tailpipe and smoke it.
>
> ~Greg
Agreed.
> www.merkur.000k2.com
>
11. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Phil Russell <pg_russell at lineone.net>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
> > > > >At the very least, it seems to have
> > > > > stopped the various flame wars that were going on...
Me and my big mouth. Sigh.
12. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Jeff Houck <jhouck at northrim.net>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
Well, this thread isn't exactly roasting anywone... yet.
<IDEOLOGY MODE ON>
What I can't understand is this. With the source code for Euphoria being
available for a rather paltry sum, why not acquire it, fix and improve a few
"problem" areas and then contribute it back to RDS for inclusion? It would
seem to me to be a better use of time and effort than being angry and placing
a "blame". Improve the language and benefit the community as a whole.
<IDEOLOGY MODE OFF>
"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
13. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
Jeff Houck wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Jeff Houck <jhouck at northrim.net>
>
> Well, this thread isn't exactly roasting anywone... yet.
>
> <IDEOLOGY MODE ON>
> What I can't understand is this. With the source code for Euphoria being
> available for a rather paltry sum, why not acquire it, fix and improve a
> few
> "problem" areas and then contribute it back to RDS for inclusion? It
> would
> seem to me to be a better use of time and effort than being angry and
> placing
> a "blame". Improve the language and benefit the community as a whole.
> <IDEOLOGY MODE OFF>
>
> "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." ~ Albert
> Einstein
The answer to that is simple, and probably the most frustating aspect of
the whole thing.
PEOPLE HAVE! And Rob ignores them just the same.
Who was it that implemented crash routine, like 2 years ago? Matt I
think, and probably Karl also.
Rob is JUST deciding to implement it.
I needed a modified interpeter for cgi on windows, so I asked someone to
implement crash routine and a few other changes, it took them all of
about 2 days, including ALL the changes I asked for.
Rob can't say that it's difficult, like he has been trying to insinuate.
Further, I can spend considerable effort implementing my own features,
such as Matt or Karl has done, in the hopes that Rob will adopt at least
some of it. But in the end, Rob is just humouring us.
Why should I _give him money_ so that I can try to _help_ him, knowing
full well that he is just going to completely disregard it?
That doesn't seem like a very prctical use of my money, and even
counter-productive. Pad Rob's pocket, so he can plug his ears and sing
when I offer him solutions, or improvements. No thanks.
I could get the source, and make a modified interpeter that does what I
want, but then I might not be able to use everyone elses code.
The source is also crippled, so I can't even distribute my modified
version for others to use. Of course I can distribute it, but who's
going to use it?
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
14. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
On 5 Nov 2004, at 15:00, Jeff Houck wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Jeff Houck <jhouck at northrim.net>
>
> Well, this thread isn't exactly roasting anywone... yet.
>
> <IDEOLOGY MODE ON>
> What I can't understand is this. With the source code for Euphoria being
> available for a rather paltry sum, why not acquire it, fix and improve a few
> "problem" areas and then contribute it back to RDS for inclusion? It would
> seem
> to me to be a better use of time and effort than being angry and placing a
> "blame". Improve the language and benefit the community as a whole. <IDEOLOGY
> MODE OFF>
Because it doesn't get included, because the modified code cannot be used
with the RDS debugger, tracer, binder, or shrouder. See also: Bach.
Kat
15. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
Derek Parnell wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
>
> Greg Haberek wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Stick that in your tailpipe and smoke it.
>
> If Honda did upgrade the Civic, would you be upset? Are any of the
> suggested upgrades going to cause you problems?
>
> If, after having upgraded it, more people started buying them. Would
> that
> upset you? Especially as that would improve spare parts prices and
> availability, and there'd be more knowledgable mechanics around.
>
> If Honda started putting seat belts and airbags in as standard
> (hey! its an analogy), would that upset you?
>
> Is it wrong to consider how things might be rather than how things are?
>
> Is it wrong to think that Civic is not yet perfect? And thus to ask
> for improvements?
>
> Who is in the better position to improve the Civic? Honda or me?
>
> Some of us regard "status quo" as an opportunity for improvement rather
> than a "life sentence".
>
> --
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
Thank you Derek.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
16. RE: The fate of Euphoria
- Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
Nov 05, 2004
-
Last edited Nov 06, 2004
Jeff Houck wrote:
>
> Well, this thread isn't exactly roasting anywone... yet.
>
> <IDEOLOGY MODE ON>
> What I can't understand is this. With the source code for Euphoria being
> available for a rather paltry sum, why not acquire it, fix and improve a few
> "problem" areas and then contribute it back to RDS for inclusion?
I believe that has been tried. RDS has not been sufficiently enticed to
adopt anyone else's changes.
Somethings suggested are against Robert Craig's programming philosophy
and thus they will never gain his acceptance - regardless whether or not
his customers would appreciate them.
Other things, such as minor syntax shorthands, have been difficult for
RDS to include, but maybe with the new Euphoria architecture that will not
be such an impediment in future. However, RDS is cautious in the extreme,
and strives for perfection before releases. This is a major factor for
their very slow rate of releasing.
I believe that there is a place of compromise that customers are willing
to go to (no pun intended). A 95% perfect release is acceptable providing
fixes are regular and frequent. The current idea that 100% perfection is
the right thing is frustrating me.
I would prefer a model of small and frequent updates.
Would you all be willing to wait until I got Win32lib.ew perfect before
releasing it? That would takes years. Or is there some appreciation for
giving you frequent (about 10 a year) releases for the library?
>It would
> seem to me to be a better use of time and effort than being angry and placing
> a "blame". Improve the language and benefit the community as a whole.
If only RDS would do that though! The impression that RDS gives me is that
it believes the language is so close to absolute perfection, that it is
impossible to doing anything constructive to it. In fact, any changes
would be a blot on it, instead.
> "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
And Euphoria is not that simple yet. It can still do with a tweak or two
to make it simpler to use. Currently, its imperfections require a degree
of complexity to overcome.
I really want to see what v2.5 has got for us before I "unleash hell" upon
RDS's Customer Enhancement Request system
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
17. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Andy Serpa wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com>
>
> Derek Parnell wrote:
> >
> > Greg Haberek wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Stick that in your tailpipe and smoke it.
> >
> > If Honda did upgrade the Civic, would you be upset? Are any of the
> > suggested upgrades going to cause you problems?
> >
> > If, after having upgraded it, more people started buying them. Would
> > that
> > upset you? Especially as that would improve spare parts prices and
> > availability, and there'd be more knowledgable mechanics around.
> >
> > If Honda started putting seat belts and airbags in as standard
> > (hey! its an analogy), would that upset you?
> >
> > Is it wrong to consider how things might be rather than how things are?
> >
> > Is it wrong to think that Civic is not yet perfect? And thus to ask
> > for improvements?
> >
> > Who is in the better position to improve the Civic? Honda or me?
> >
> > Some of us regard "status quo" as an opportunity for improvement rather
> > than a "life sentence".
> >
>
> All true, but the insinuation seems to be that because the Civic could
> be better, we shouldn't like the current Civic -- that the current Civic
> should make us angry. The way I feel is that it could be better, but
> what it is now is good. If it never changes again, it will still be
> good. Good is good.
I have never implied that. I do request that people speak up for what
they think.
And guess what? I've tried being polite and patient, and I have found I
get more response from people when they feel threatened or otherwise
'wronged'. The are compelled to defend themselves, instead of taking
their own initiative, which nobody wants to do. Until people start
saying what they think, I will continue to challenge them.
You just said it yourself Andy. Eu is good, but it could be better. But
you can't be bothered to express HOW you think it could be better?
Further, you would continue to give Rob your money, eventhough he
entirely ignores perfectly legitamate proposals that would benefit all
of us?
Nobody said you should be as adamant as me, but voicing your opinion of
what Rob is doing is a good start. The impression I get is that you
simply can't be bothered.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
18. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Chris Bensler wrote:
>
>
>> I have never implied that. I do request that people speak up for what
> they think.
>
I do. I am right now.
> You just said it yourself Andy. Eu is good, but it could be better. But
> you can't be bothered to express HOW you think it could be better?
I've made lots of suggestions for Euphoria -- some of them of have implemented.
I've reported bugs, and they've been fixed. I've even stated that the best thing
that could happen to Euphoria is for it to become a failure for Rob he might be
motivated to make it open-source. I've also complained about the slow rate of
change.
> Further, you would continue to give Rob your money, eventhough he
> entirely ignores perfectly legitamate proposals that would benefit all
> of us?
>
First of all, I've given Rob exactly ONE product registration for $29 I think it
was. I've used Euphoria now for about 5 years, pretty much daily in the last 2
years. It is easily the biggest bargain of the century for me. It is the most
robust and reliable piece of software I've ever used, and it makes me money
daily.
Second of all, I will give him the registrations for v2.5 because I want what he
is selling -- Euphoria version 2.5. That's what I'm paying for, not some future
ambiguous promises that he wouldn't be obligated to fulfill anyway. Back to the
Civic -- if they never did come out with a new model that doesn't mean you got
screwed on the one you actually paid for. That's the notion I don't agree with
-- that I've somehow been or will be screwed over by RDS. I use a great product
that I paid a trivial amount for, and will happily buy the upgrade. How paying a
low price for something that works great for me is supposed to make me feel
wronged I can't fathom.
> Nobody said you should be as adamant as me, but voicing your opinion of
> what Rob is doing is a good start. The impression I get is that you
> simply can't be bothered.
>
Not true. I haven't been a hard-ass about it, but I've made lots of
suggestions. Here would be my favorites:
-- variable_id() (to look up & and to assign) -- this would increase the power
of Eu greatly
-- conditional operator
-- let's get all the standard functions included in the standard libraries that
come with Eu: abs(), etc.
-- exit(n) -- break out of nested loops
-- block comments
-- crash/cleanup routines -- looks like he is handling that
-- routine_ids for built-ins -- v2.5?
-- the ability to use a type to ALTER the value assigned to something
-- more consistent / proper use of types when translating -- he improved this by
having types with side-effects be included in translated programs but for my
money a translated program should operate the same as interpreted 100% of the
time
-- much better documentation for newbies -- Euphoria is touted as a good "first"
language but you need to have knowledge of low-level details to avoid common
mistakes (for instance, the impreciseness of floating-point variables)
-- a negative suggestion -- I *do not* want to see GOTO
-- the "import" style of local including that has been much discussed lately, or
some better solution to namespace issues when included a file that includes other
files with globals in them
Those are off the top of my head that I can remember posting about in the past.
They would all be nice, but none of them are going to change my life (except
variable_id(), which is why it is at the top). Variable_id() would literally
change my life. I'm hoping to at least implement it for myself with the new
version. If I found Euphoria so lacking that it wasn't workable for me, then I
wouldn't use it at all. (Which is why my suggestions are not radical.) I
suspect that as technology marches on and Euphoria lags behind that at some point
that day will come. But it hasn't yet.
(I'm thinking of making O'Caml my language of the future -- looks as powerful as
Euphoria but even faster. I like the combination of functional/practical it
offers but I can never seem to find time to learn it.)
19. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Andy Serpa wrote:
<SNIP>
> Not true. I haven't been a hard-ass about it, but I've made lots of
> suggestions. Here would be my favorites:
>
> -- variable_id() (to look up & and to assign) -- this would increase the
> power of Eu greatly
>
> -- conditional operator
>
> -- let's get all the standard functions included in the standard
> libraries that come with Eu: abs(), etc.
>
> -- exit(n) -- break out of nested loops
>
> -- block comments
>
> -- crash/cleanup routines -- looks like he is handling that
>
> -- routine_ids for built-ins -- v2.5?
>
> -- the ability to use a type to ALTER the value assigned to something
>
> -- more consistent / proper use of types when translating -- he improved
> this by having types with side-effects be included in translated
> programs but for my money a translated program should operate the same
> as interpreted 100% of the time
>
> -- much better documentation for newbies -- Euphoria is touted as a good
> "first" language but you need to have knowledge of low-level details to
> avoid common mistakes (for instance, the impreciseness of floating-point
> variables)
>
> -- a negative suggestion -- I *do not* want to see GOTO
>
> -- the "import" style of local including that has been much discussed
> lately, or some better solution to namespace issues when included a file
> that includes other files with globals in them
Thank you Andy for reiterating your suggestions.
I agree with most all of those suggestions and I'm also tired of
reiterating them.
I think the largest problem with the Euphoria product is the lack of
organization. Our ability to compile meaningful requests lists, that
others can easily collaborate with. And a detailed description of RDS's
philosophies, plans, considerations and responses to denied requests
would be a good start.
Then we wouldn't have to keep reiterating everything, and could avoid
alot of this contraversy.
I cannot understand why RDS neglects the other aspects of it's Euphoria
product. The organization of it's community is far more important than
any unconsulted implementations that RDS might dream up.
I agree with the changes being made for 2.5, not because it allows me to
implement my own suggestions, but because it allows me to make even MORE
radical changes, that I would never expect RDS to make.
But I see it as a way for Rob to cop out on making any changes himself.
It gives him an excuse to say that we can all just make our own changes.
Unfortunately, that is NOT to anyone's benefit really. A great majority
of the suggestions being made are quite unamimous. Some things can only
be implemented in an official version.
I suspect that Rob refrains from creating such organization, because it
would make all of these issues come to surface, and he would have no
avenue of escape. He's making a business decision, to compensate for his
philosophies, and unwillingness to comply.
By keeping us in the dark, we can't disagree until it's too late. And we
can't collaborate to agree.
These types of things are why I created the empire website.
Hopefully it will evolve into a culmination of real insight into the
value of Euphoria, and it's limitations.
It's not a wonder people think it's the greatest thing since apple pie.
Only after spending years learning it, and you begin to push it's
boundaries, will you discover Euphoria's ugliness.
RDS does a good job of covering up, instead of facing the problems.
<SNIP>
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
20. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Dear EU Forum members
I do not know what future Eu has.
**From one viewpoint**
My only interest in Eu's fate is whether the investment in time I
have taken to learn and use it, and the fee I paid for the Private Ed
of the interpreter v 2.4 will be "lost" if it "dies" tomorrow.
If Eu died tomorrow - it would owe me nothing. And I would probably
continue to use if for a number of years.
I suspect many others also find Eu *currently* a very useful tool
which is very good value (in terms of fee, ease of use, power). So I
suspect it will keep going for a while yet.
**Could it be better?**
For whom? Making it better for you may mean it is no longer as useful
to me (eg harder for me to learn because of the extra feature you
wanted).
So if RDS judges what is "better" correctly, they will make more
money (and/or have more users), if not they will have less users (and
presumably make less money). If they are too slow in making Eu
"better", they will loose users to other "better" languages.
In contrast to what a number of members seem to be implying, RDS
probably have quite a lot at stake in making Eu "better".
**From another viewpoint**
The above viewpoint is rather "dry" - there is no passion in it.
Many of the posts I have read seem to be from people who work in or
understand the software industry and who *care* about Eu and it's
future. They seem to be from people who can see that Eu has a great
future and may miss out on it because of lack of certain features, or
lack of pace in its evolution.
I'm not sure why they *care* about Eu - perhaps they have put in much
more to the development of Eu than I have - eg via contributed code
into the archive. However, I suspect RDS may do well listening to
these people.
David
21. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Greg Haberek wrote:
<snip>
> > Some of us regard "status quo" as an opportunity for improvement rather
> > than a "life sentence".
>
> I'm sure Rob has a huge list of improvements written down somewhere.
So he says. Why wont he show us? He would prefer that we sit here a
bitch about the same things over and over like broken records?
Most of us get frustrated and move on. That's not very fair to us.
> I'm sure he'd love to give us everything we want. But maybe instead of
> looking at this from a user/programmer point of view, maybe we should
> look at it from his point of view, as an owner of a business: Its bad
> marketing to put out all your upgrades at one. "Don't put all your
> eggs in one basket" so to speak. Why would he couple every single
> upgrade into version 2.5 or 2.6? What would 2.7 and 2.8 hold for us?
Nobody said he has to implement everything all at once.
> Let's look at the longevity of the language, or the "Fate of
> Euphoria." If we keep proposing upgrades, there *will* be a fate for
> Euphoria, since Rob will always have a list to choose from when
> implementing new features. What happens if he puts in everything right
> away? He won't make money and we won't have new versions. No one will
> be happy with Euphoria and the language will die. Rob won't make
> money, he'll go poor, starve and die. DO WE WANT ROB TO DIE BECAUSE WE
> WERE TOO SELFISH AND WANTED ALL OUR UPGRADES AT ONCE?
Some of us are thinking beyond our own requirements.
I have never made a suggestion specifically to benefit me.
In fact most of my suggestions are geared towards improving Eu, and
helping RDS be more organized, so that they can focus better on
developing the things that programmers are missing, instead of playing
politics.
> Change is good. Change comes with time. With time comes maturity. So
> let's give Euphoria some time to mature. We're only on Version 2.x.
That's a joke right?
>
> ~Greg
> www.merkur.000k2.com <-- written in 98% Euphoria
>
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
22. RE: The fate of Euphoria
David Jarvis wrote:
>
>
> Dear EU Forum members
>
> I do not know what future Eu has.
>
> **From one viewpoint**
> My only interest in Eu's fate is whether the investment in time I
> have taken to learn and use it, and the fee I paid for the Private Ed
> of the interpreter v 2.4 will be "lost" if it "dies" tomorrow.
>
> If Eu died tomorrow - it would owe me nothing. And I would probably
> continue to use if for a number of years.
>
> I suspect many others also find Eu *currently* a very useful tool
> which is very good value (in terms of fee, ease of use, power). So I
> suspect it will keep going for a while yet.
>
> **Could it be better?**
> For whom? Making it better for you may mean it is no longer as useful
> to me (eg harder for me to learn because of the extra feature you
> wanted).
>
> So if RDS judges what is "better" correctly, they will make more
> money (and/or have more users), if not they will have less users (and
> presumably make less money). If they are too slow in making Eu
> "better", they will loose users to other "better" languages.
>
> In contrast to what a number of members seem to be implying, RDS
> probably have quite a lot at stake in making Eu "better".
>
> **From another viewpoint**
> The above viewpoint is rather "dry" - there is no passion in it.
>
> Many of the posts I have read seem to be from people who work in or
> understand the software industry and who *care* about Eu and it's
> future. They seem to be from people who can see that Eu has a great
> future and may miss out on it because of lack of certain features, or
> lack of pace in its evolution.
>
> I'm not sure why they *care* about Eu - perhaps they have put in much
> more to the development of Eu than I have - eg via contributed code
> into the archive. However, I suspect RDS may do well listening to
> these people.
>
> David
>
Those are very good opinions David, and well said.
The changes that most of us are asking for are not really for our own
needs, as much as it is for Eu's needs. The majority of those changes
would make Eu simpler to learn and use. Not more difficult.
None of us want to change what Eu is, just make it better.
Euphoria's greatest trait is it's concise, and simple syntax.
For example, many of us would like to see a better namespacing
implementation. I personally haven't pushed hard for that one, because I
beleive the problem lies elsewhere. The namespacing problem is a
secondary solution to that problem... same with the proposed 'import',
that is another secondary solution, it doesn't address the actual
problem. How globals are handled.
To fix that problem properly, would require breaking alot of code, so
again, I haven't pushed for that either.
Some things like how includes are handled though, can be rectified,
without affecting anybody's code, and would provide us with the ability
to better organize all the libraries we collect and use. And also to
better organize our distributed code with less fuss.
Most of what we (me at least) are asking for is not for Robert Craig to
implement our requests, but to give them a fair chance to be considered.
Currently, it's near impossible for us collaboratively agree on any
issues, because there are no records kept, other than this extremely
adhoc forum and Rob's half-baked responses. Further, Robert won't even
respond to many of the requests, because he's already responded in the
past. That doesn't help newer users who weren't around for those
conversations. And it doesn't help people to contend both the user's
requests, or Rob's responses.
There are als many requests I would NOT like to see in Eu, yet I'm not
going to sit on this list waiting for people to make those suggestions,
so that I can tell them why I think it shouldn't be.
But that is the only option.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
23. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
>
> Chris Bensler wrote:
>
> > Greg Haberek wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>> Some of us regard "status quo" as an opportunity for improvement rather
> >>> than a "life sentence".
> >>
> >> I'm sure Rob has a huge list of improvements written down somewhere.
> >
> > So he says. Why wont he show us? He would prefer that we sit here a
> > bitch about the same things over and over like broken records?
>
> Rob wrote that he perhaps *will* show us (see my other recent post in
> the thread "Old request list"). To be fair, we all can ask ourselves why
> we didn't even write a reply concerning the "Old request list" up to
> now.
> (I know there were replies in that thread, but they were concerning
> technical stuff such as CGI.)
>
> <big snip>
>
> Regards,
> Juergen
>
Notice Juergen, that he said MAYBE.
It should not be a consideration at all.
And people have been asking him for such a thing for half a decade, and
it still a MAYBE.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
24. RE: The fate of Euphoria
I'am sure if anyone is not satisfied with Euphoria,
Rob would be more than happy to refund your money and
than you can leave this forum and go on to develop your
own perfect langauge which is kept up to date by the
minute and will contain everything everybody needs.
I think that was the idea behind PLM which I don't
see everyone using.
Bernie
My files in archive:
w32engin.ew mixedlib.e eu_engin.e win32eru.ew
Can be downloaded here:
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=bernie+ryanI'am
sure if anyone is not satisfied with Euphoria,
25. RE: The fate of Euphoria
Greg Haberek wrote:
>
>
> > > Change is good. Change comes with time. With time comes maturity. So
> > > let's give Euphoria some time to mature. We're only on Version 2.x.
> >
> >
> > That's a joke right?
>
> I only wish. How old is C? 40 years plus, right? And how many people
> use C? How many different C compilers are there? Euphoria is roughly
> 10 years old, it's still wet behind the ears. And its only being
> developed by one person. C was developed by teams of people, Heck it
> was re-developed into C++ and again into C#.NET.
>
> I don't think everyone jumped on C right away, or C++ for that matter.
> I but over the years people realized how powerful and dynamic C could
> be. So more and more people started using it. Now, a half a century
> later, 75% of all programmers (that I know) use C. If Rob continues to
> develop Euphoria, and we as users continue to use it and love it and
> promote it to other users, then maybe Euphoria will grow to the level
> of C, and in 30 years people will wonder why they ever relied on such
> an archaic language in the first place.
>
> ~Greg
> www.merkur.000k2.com <-- I don't think its working right now
>
C was adopted quite quickly afaik. It was developed as a solution to
programming in ASM, when developing on the (then new) unix platform.
The fact that it's so popular now is because over time, C developed as
one of the only alternatives to languages like basic. ANSI was asked to
step in, and made the language an industry standard. Of course it's
popular. Eu is not a comparison to C in the slightest.
What about other languages like Java and PHP? How about D?
They are roughly the same age as Eu, and were started by single
developers too.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
