1. Re: Coming real soon!
- Posted by francis at gmx.co.uk
Jul 21, 2001
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C11297.AD8327E0
charset="iso-8859-1"
Has this comment has been totally misconstrued? When compared to other =
languages, or specifically their Win32 capabilities, I think Euphoria =
currently has set a very ad-hoc precedent. To cut the shit, the API is =
effectively a backbone segment of every Win32 language; this is =
indisputable. And you cannot statically link functions with Euphoria, =
only dynamically; so although this is not really the issue it =
effectively means every program must include the API definition before =
it can do anything else. What Euphoria needs is a base API library, from =
which every other windows library is built apon. From the base comes =
protocol. I agree these problems are not specifically Euphoria Language =
issues but software implentation issues. But comeon...
Although WIN32Lib is a seperate issue, it is an example of a very =
different (high level) protocol by which to communicate with the API. =
But how about a bit of creative engineering? With a Win32 base library =
covering (hopefully the entire) API, Win32Lib could just include this =
before declaring its own routines for (in my opinion) superior =
engineered code. Right now anyone who wants to get lower than Win32Lib =
has to wade through API definitions and tedious copy/paste activities. I =
know, I have half the damn API plastered accross my hard drive which I =
add to as needed. Although it is beside to point to argue libraries are =
NOT part of the Euphoria Language, API protocol is usually semi-DEFINED =
in other langauges before you actually "include libraries". Yes, ok its =
more complex than that; but in currently in Euphoria its 20x more =
complex than that. Does everyone who wants to step ahead into the more =
complex and faster waters beyond Win32lib have to spend hours upon hours =
manually creating the masterpiece of API definition?
Still, besides how far off the point this thread is going to be argued, =
who can criticise Bernie here for what he's doing? Who can possibly =
argue that Euphoria(Win32) does not need this library? Hello?
I fullheartedly support Bernie with this brave endeavour. If completed I =
will definitely be "including" it in my code. I believe it is a positive =
step forward to simplify the first aspect of low level (or any =
level-library) programming for Euphoria.
Francis
This discussion clearly shows the main shortcoming of the Euphoria =
system. The lack of consistency.
The fact that everybody (and his dog) can extend the language with =
lib's of their own may, at first=20
glance, seems an advantage, in reality it is a big minus!
I think that writing libraries is NOT extending laguage.
Why wouldn't anybody write his own libraries ?
You would have a permission from RDS to write a library?
And that's why Euphoria will never replace Basic or any other =
language for that matter!
Nearly every language have some libraries written by users.
What kind of consistency do you mean ?=20
Sorry, but I can't figure out what I are you trying to say.
Fritz Deneken
Martin Stachon
------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C11297.AD8327E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4207.2601" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Has this comment has been totally =
misconstrued?=20
When compared to other languages, or specifically their Win32 =
capabilities, I=20
think Euphoria currently has set a very ad-hoc precedent. =
To cut=20
the shit, the API is effectively a backbone segment of every =
Win32=20
language; this is indisputable. And you cannot statically link functions =
with=20
Euphoria, only dynamically; so although this is not really the issue it=20
effectively means every program must include the API definition before =
it can do=20
anything else. What Euphoria needs is a base API library, from which =
every other=20
windows library is built apon. From the base comes protocol. I agree =
these=20
problems are not specifically Euphoria Language issues but software =
implentation=20
issues. But comeon...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Although WIN32Lib is a seperate issue, =
it is an=20
example of a very different (high level) protocol by which to =
communicate=20
with the API. But how about a bit of creative engineering? With a =
Win32=20
base library covering (hopefully the entire) API, Win32Lib could just =
include=20
this before declaring its own routines for (in my opinion) superior =
engineered code. Right now anyone who wants to get lower than Win32Lib =
has to=20
wade through API definitions and tedious copy/paste activities. I know, =
I have=20
half the damn API plastered accross my hard drive which I add to as =
needed.=20
Although it is beside to point to argue libraries are NOT part of the =
Euphoria=20
Language, API protocol is usually semi-DEFINED in other langauges before =
you=20
actually "include libraries". Yes, ok its more complex than that; but in =
currently in Euphoria its 20x more complex than that. Does everyone who =
wants to=20
step ahead into the more complex and faster waters =
beyond Win32lib=20
have to spend hours upon hours manually creating the masterpiece =
of API=20
definition?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Still, besides how far off the point =
this thread is=20
going to be argued, who can criticise Bernie here for what he's doing? =
Who can=20
possibly argue that Euphoria(Win32) does not need this library?=20
Hello?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I fullheartedly support Bernie with =
this brave=20
endeavour. If completed I will definitely be "including" it in my code. =
I=20
believe it is a positive step forward to simplify the first aspect of =
low level=20
(or any level-library) programming for Euphoria.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Francis</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This discussion clearly shows the =
main=20
shortcoming of the Euphoria system. The lack of =
consistency.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The fact that everybody (and his =
dog) can=20
extend the language with lib's of their own may, at first =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>glance, seems an advantage, in =
reality it is a=20
big minus!</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>I think that writing libraries =
is NOT=20
extending laguage.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>Why wouldn't anybody write his =
own libraries=20
?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>You would have a permission from =
RDS to=20
write a library?</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>And that's why Euphoria will never =
replace=20
Basic or any other language for that =
matter!</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>Nearly every language have some =
libraries=20
written by users.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>What kind of consistency do you =
mean ?=20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Arial CE" size=3D2>Sorry, but I can't figure out =
what I are you=20
trying to say.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Fritz Deneken</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Martin=20
------=_NextPart_000_0040_01C11297.AD8327E0--
