1. RE: Food For thought
president at insight-concepts.com wrote:
>
> SR Wrote:
>
> I don't think it's limited to novices
> -----------------------Response-----------------------------
> Of course Euphoria is not only for novices, you missed the point.
> It is easy enough for a novices to learn, but powerful enough for an
> experienced programmer to appreciate.
> --
Okay, so how are you going to PROVE that without comparison to other
languages? You yourself already compared it to BASIC. The point is it
SURVIVES a comparison to those languages in some situations, but not
all. That's what the wishlist is about - trying to increase the number
of areas Eu survives comparison. Rob can certainly increase the appeal
of Eu by adopting some ideas from other languages. Not everything
everyone else has done is crap.
>
> SR Wrote:
> What is that something NEW that we are creating, exactly? What does
> it do that the other languages don't?
>
> -----------------------Response-----------------------------
> It is obvious you do not come from a programming background.
> Euphoria has many aspects that can be considered "New".
> The learning curve alone is enough to fill the Niche you mentioned
> and support my claim its "New". The ability to run programs
> instantly, without waiting for compiling is not new, but it is new
> for this level of language. Also, Euphoria cross platform
> capabilities sets it apart from other languages. Also considered to
> be "New"
Not any of this is new. Python, Ruby, Rebol all have these things. What
exactly is new about Eu? I would say the idea of atoms and sequences as
only 2 data types. That's the only thing I can think of offhand.
> I was able to show my girlfriend how to make a program in a hour and
> thirty minutes. What other serious programming language has that type
> of learning curve?
Python, Ruby, Rebol to start.
> ----
> SR Wrote:
>
> That's why we look at other languages. That's why we get so many
> suggestions to make the language look like others. It's because we
> all have different ideas about what we want to do with Eu. And we all
> want to be able to write our code efficiently. Many times we are at
> cross-purposes. To reach the widest possible user base, it's
> inevitable that Eu will pick up some of the ideas and functionality
> of other languages, if not the syntax. If it doesn't it will limit
> its usefulness.
>
>
> -----------------------Response-----------------------
>
> If we add all the requests the other members want, we are eliminating
> Euphoria's main feature "Easy To Learn". If we are going to take
> aspects from other languages, and throw them into Euphoria, we might
> as well use the other languages.
I agree with you, unless you're trying to say that Eu should be static
from this point. Clearly there are a few areas that should be explored.
Namespaces is number 1. After that, I don't know. But looking at what
other languages have that Eu doesn't is certainly the place to start.
There's a reason that those languages have the programmer's eyes, and
it's not all marketing.
> Basic, C/C++, Python, Per/CGI, Euphoria......ect ect all do the same
> thing, but the slight differences sets them apart. If you take
> functions from other program languages and throw them into Euphoria,
> and someone coming from a C/C++ or Basic background tries Euphoria
> and sees the languages are similar, they will most likely remain
> with their original language.
>
No kidding?
How about they start looking for things that are easy to do in their
current language, and find that it's not easy to do at all in Eu? Will
they switch then?
I don't think anyone believes Eu should have the kitchen sink with it.
But we need to identify the critical parts that Eu needs. Win32lib was a
critical part. It's now close to production value. A good IDE was
needed, and we're getting one. We need a few more things, and I don't
think adding some essentials, even if it's in a *production* quality
include is asking for too much. If we don't talk about what we think
needs to be done, Rob is not going to know what's important to us.
I agree that we shouldn't just add everything because some other
language has it. But to ignore something that could be useful JUST
because some other language already provides it is wrong, too.
We come off as whiners sometimes, but the Eu pace of progress is slow.
We get frustrated. I don't remember when I registered, but it was at
least a year ago. I'm still waiting for namespaces so that it will be
feasible to make a modular GUI library. I quit using Eu for a long time
because I got frustrated waiting for changes, either in the language or
in the quality of the includes and their documentation.
The only reason I started paying attention again was because Judith's
IDE is better than the IDEs for Python, Rebol and Ruby.
2. RE: Food For thought
how's this sound? when you register, for a little extra cash, you could
get read access to a CVS, make some diffs of the source once you make
your changes, submit em to rob and he puts them in. and if you give away
the source for free, then he sends the police after you :)
