1. RE: Blow
What's wrong with David's EE editor? I use it religiously. I too was
completely turned away from ED.ex. No offense Rob, but it IS quite awful
to use. Particularly for a newbie programmer. Not very pleasant to look
at and just as bad to use.. Really should be replaced..
I think EE should be included instead, or better, EECS, as it integrates
with windows as well. This one IS coded in EU. SO it would also promote
the usage of EU.
I disagree that EU should be set up to use directly from windows.
Windows is much too difficult to program. I think as soon as newbies,
see what's involved to program with windows, they would be completely
deterred. Like someone said, you have to learn to crawl before you can
walk. And programming windows, is like swimming to me. Nevermind even
walking.
However, most people who DL euphoria. will be TRYING to use it from
windows first.. The install should at least create an EU shorcut folder
on the desktop. Detailing how to go about accessing the EU directory and
the help files.. Would also be nice if Eu created the appropriate
associations for windows.
IMHO, it is essential to learn DOS before learning windows. It is much
simpler, and people are not as likely to get confused with all the extra
code required to program in windows. I've been programming for 3 or 4
years now. And I do know a bit of C and also Visual BASIC, among a few
other BASIC languages. Yet, I'm am JUST starting to learn to program in
windows. Even now, I find it extremely difficult to do. Even with some
background experience.
Don't think that the IDE should be included either, for much of the same
reasons. People will get attached to the IDE. albeit, many people prefer
to use an IDE rather than code by hand, but to me they will just have
that much more trouble to learn to program, as they wouls still be
required to do some hardcoding. This would make the learning curve much
larger as their coding practice would be a lot less frequent. Once
people have enough experience, THEN they can make the choice of whether
or not they want to use an IDE. But I don't think it's a good place to
start.
Chris
mabrown at SENET.COM.AU wrote:
> Travis wrote....
>
> > Rob Craig might object, saying that there's always ed. I used ed for
> about two
> > minutes when I first downloaded Euphoria, then gave up and went to
> NotePad.
>
> I agree. Unfortunately, I don't think ed is such a good advert for Eu,
> especially
> where newbies are concerned and it is a good chance of being the very
> first
> thing they use.
>
> I really think MEdit would be a good choice to bundle with Eu. It is
> small.
> It isn't programmed using Eu though to the best of my knowledge, so that
> might be a minus.
>
> Perhaps Judith's IDE when it is complete?
>
> Mark
>
>
2. RE: Blow
The main reason I DL'd Eu, is it's simplicity. Adding 'EXTRAS' would've
deterred me from getting it I think. They should be optional. Not core
parts of the language package.
The last thing I would want to see is Euphoria turn into one of those
DEV languages that includes everything plus the kitchen sink and
bathtub. They should be reccommended from the DOCS though..
I like the idea that the EU installation can fit on a single floppy
disk. This makes it portable. I can take it with me wherever I go, and
install it in a matter of a minute or two. I'm up a coding in a matter
of fifteen minutes. Even having to set up the windows associations, set
up win32lib and EEcs too. This I like. It is simple and a lot less
complications. Adding things to the core would only add even more
confusion for those who are already having trouble getting it up and
running as it is now..
Maybe Rob should consider having an ACCESSORIES installation for EU.
People could still get the basic package, and also get the Do-Dads and
What-Nots if they WANT to.
Chris
Travis Beaty wrote:
> In a message dated 3/1/2001 11:20:32 PM Central Standard Time,
> mabrown at SENET.COM.AU writes:
>
> > I really think MEdit would be a good choice to bundle with Eu. It is
> > small.
> > It isn't programmed using Eu though to the best of my knowledge, so that
> > might be a minus.
> >
> > Perhaps Judith's IDE when it is complete?
>
> Yes, Judith's IDE, when completed, would be an excellent choice.
> Unfortunately, that's liable to put off all the DOS diehards. I'd
> suggest
> including in the distribution both Judith's IDE and CS:EE. That would
> give
> both camps a reason to cheer.
>
>
>
> Happy Hunting,
>
> Travis Beaty
> Claude, Texas.
>
>
