1. Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
> > Junko and I just got tired of doing it.
> > Actually, she wanted to keep going, but
> > I wanted to spend less time at the print shop and the post office,
> > and more time programming. Also, it seemed silly in this
> > day and age to be shipping a bunch of paper half way
> > around the world, when the information is available for
> > free in electronic form, including hyper links.
> >
> I agree with you 100%. That is your job, what you know best. Please
> don't do
> anything else. What I'm trying to make others than you and me understand
> is
> that they could write about (Euphoria) what they know and make money
> doing it.
> I'm sure you'll be very thankful if a textbook bring another bunch of
> brand new
> customers to your door, won't you?
I've also thought of the need for (or simple convenience of) a book
introducing programming via Euphoria, and Euphoria via programming. I'm
sure many others have too.
Perhaps the demand for this is growing. I don't exactly have much time
myself right now, but if my article is received well, and no one else
jumps at this, I might consider it myself. (Naturally, I'd be interested
in profiting from it, but another side of me would want to make it an
e-book distributed freely with Eu. Hmm.)
Rod Jackson
2. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
Hi Rod:
On 11 Feb 2002, at 12:28, Rod Jackson wrote:
>
>
> > > Junko and I just got tired of doing it.
> > > Actually, she wanted to keep going, but
> > > I wanted to spend less time at the print shop and the post office,
> > > and more time programming. Also, it seemed silly in this
> > > day and age to be shipping a bunch of paper half way
> > > around the world, when the information is available for
> > > free in electronic form, including hyper links.
> > >
> > I agree with you 100%. That is your job, what you know best. Please
> > don't do
> > anything else. What I'm trying to make others than you and me understand is
> > that they could write about (Euphoria) what they know and make money doing
> > it.
> > I'm sure you'll be very thankful if a textbook bring another bunch of brand
> > new customers to your door, won't you?
>
> I've also thought of the need for (or simple convenience of) a book
> introducing programming via Euphoria, and Euphoria via programming. I'm
> sure many others have too.
>
I can assure you that is!
> Perhaps the demand for this is growing. I don't exactly have much time
> myself right now, but if my article is received well, and no one else
> jumps at this, I might consider it myself. (Naturally, I'd be interested
> in profiting from it, but another side of me would want to make it an
> e-book distributed freely with Eu. Hmm.)
>
>
That's the idea. You lead many fellows to Rob's door and Rob will share part of
his gains with you. Nothing is simpler. Then another guy/girl may consider
teach Euphoria other way and them we'll have a second book, and another, and
maybe O'Reilly can get interest to publish something or maybe they are just
tired of Perl... A book is also easier to translate into other languages as the
difficult part is to show the idea, the core meaning. The rest you get from
language reference. That's how things happens, but needs a first pebble at the
pond to make waves!
> Rod Jackson
>
I want to publicly thank you for your reply. You gave me new hopes.
-- Euler
3. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
- Posted by encephalon1 at msn.com
Feb 12, 2002
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B374.F7725CD0
Do you think that Eu is far enough along in the development process, though?
From browsing through this list for some time
now, I have gathered that there are still a few features missing that make the
language a little less 'competitive' than a
few other more established language; of course, there are numerous advantages as
well. The language is functional, but is it
developed enough to catch the attention of the programming community as a whole?
----- Original Message -----
From: Euler German
Subject: Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
Hi Rod:
On 11 Feb 2002, at 12:28, Rod Jackson wrote:
>
>
> > > Junko and I just got tired of doing it.
> > > Actually, she wanted to keep going, but
> > > I wanted to spend less time at the print shop and the post office,
> > > and more time programming. Also, it seemed silly in this
> > > day and age to be shipping a bunch of paper half way
> > > around the world, when the information is available for
> > > free in electronic form, including hyper links.
> > >
> > I agree with you 100%. That is your job, what you know best. Please
> > don't do
> > anything else. What I'm trying to make others than you and me understand is
> > that they could write about (Euphoria) what they know and make money doing
> > it.
> > I'm sure you'll be very thankful if a textbook bring another bunch of brand
> > new customers to your door, won't you?
>
> I've also thought of the need for (or simple convenience of) a book
> introducing programming via Euphoria, and Euphoria via programming. I'm
> sure many others have too.
>
I can assure you that is!
> Perhaps the demand for this is growing. I don't exactly have much time
> myself right now, but if my article is received well, and no one else
> jumps at this, I might consider it myself. (Naturally, I'd be interested
> in profiting from it, but another side of me would want to make it an
> e-book distributed freely with Eu. Hmm.)
>
>
That's the idea. You lead many fellows to Rob's door and Rob will share part of
his gains with you. Nothing is simpler. Then another guy/girl may consider
teach Euphoria other way and them we'll have a second book, and another, and
maybe O'Reilly can get interest to publish something or maybe they are just
tired of Perl... A book is also easier to translate into other languages as the
difficult part is to show the idea, the core meaning. The rest you get from
language reference. That's how things happens, but needs a first pebble at the
pond to make waves!
> Rod Jackson
>
I want to publicly thank you for your reply. You gave me new hopes.
-- Euler
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B374.F7725CD0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<HTML><BODY STYLE="font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Do
you think that Eu is far enough along in the
development process, though? From browsing through this list for some time
now, I have gathered that there are still a
few features missing that make the language a little less 'competitive' than a
few other more established language; of
course, there are numerous advantages as well. The language is functional,
but is it developed enough to catch the
attention of the programming community as a whole?</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px;
MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV
style="FONT: 10pt Arial">----- Original
Message -----</DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt Arial; COLOR:
black"><B>From:</B> Euler German</DIV> <DIV
style="FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 11, 2002 5:16 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>To:</B>
EUforum</DIV> <DIV style="FONT!
: 10pt Arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re:
Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>============ The Euphoria Mailing
List ============<BR><BR>Hi Rod:<BR><BR>On 11 Feb 2002, at 12:28, Rod Jackson
wrote:<BR><BR>><BR>><BR>> > >
Junko and I just got tired of doing it.<BR>> > > Actually, she wanted
to keep going, but<BR>> > > I wanted
to spend less time at the print shop and the post office,<BR>> > > and
more time programming. Also, it seemed silly
in this<BR>> > > day and age to be shipping a bunch of paper half
way<BR>> > > around the world, when the
information is available for<BR>> > > free in electronic form,
including hyper links.<BR>> > ><BR>> >
I agree with you 100%. That is your job, what you know best. Please<BR>> >
don't do<BR>> > anything else. What
I'm trying to make others than you and me understand is<BR>> > that they
could write about (Euphoria) what they know !
and make money doing it.<BR>> &
gt; I'm sure you'll be very thankful if a textbook bring another bunch of
brand<BR>> > new customers to your door,
won't you?<BR>><BR>> I've also thought of the need for (or simple
convenience of) a book<BR>> introducing
programming via Euphoria, and Euphoria via programming. I'm<BR>> sure many
others have too.<BR>><BR>I can assure you
that is!<BR><BR>> Perhaps the demand for this is growing. I don't exactly
have much time<BR>> myself right now, but if
my article is received well, and no one else<BR>> jumps at this, I might
consider it myself. (Naturally, I'd be
interested<BR>> in profiting from it, but another side of me would want to
make it an<BR>> e-book distributed freely
with Eu. Hmm.)<BR>><BR>><BR>That's the idea. You lead many fellows to
Rob's door and Rob will share part of<BR>his
gains with you. Nothing is simpler. Then another guy/girl may consider<BR>teach
Euphoria other way and them we'll have a
second book, and another,!
and<BR>maybe O'Reilly can get int
erest to publish something or maybe they are just<BR>tired of Perl... A book is
also easier to translate into other
languages as the<BR>difficult part is to show the idea, the core meaning. The
rest you get from<BR>language reference. That's
how things happens, but needs a first pebble at the<BR>pond to make
waves!<BR><BR>> Rod Jackson<BR>><BR>I want to
publicly thank you for your reply. You gave me new hopes.<BR><BR>--
Euler<BR><BR>==^================================================================<BR>This
email was sent to:
encephalon1 at msn.com<BR><BR>EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here:
http://topica.com/u/?b1dd66.b2PHWj<BR>Or send an email to:
EUforum-unsubscribe at topica.com<BR><BR>T O P I C A -- Register now to manage
your
mail!<BR>http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register<BR>==^================================================================<
href='http://explorer.!
msn.com'>http://explorer.msn.com</
a><br></p>
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B374.F7725CD0--
4. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
<FontFamily><param>Times New Roman</param><bigger>Yes, though it's not on my
hands to convince a programming community of
what they're missing by not giving it a (serious) try. I'm not that
important or have that much influence. It's also true that many
features are uncomplete though functional. I can see people giving more
attention do EDS now (what is more of my taste than games). BTW, please
game guys, no flames! 
I just received a mail from Travis Beaty about books and ideas. It was
good to hear from Travis, a person which judgement I respect very much.
His idea about making Eu popular is very clever -- visibility -- that
could be translate into exposure. What else can I say? He's absolutely
true. Use Eu to build "visible" apps. If they like your job they may
get curious to know what language you use for building, how come it's
so fast, so tiny, etc. I told you that I knew about Eu from a country
fellow that made Hide in Picture from a note at Lockergnome. That's
cool!
-- Euler
On 12 Feb 2002, at 3:25, encephalon1 at msn.com wrote:
<FontFamily><param>Times New Roman</param><bigger>
Do you think that Eu is far enough along in the development process,
though? From browsing through this list for some time now, I have
gathered that there are still a few features missing that make the
language a little less 'competitive' than a few other more established
language; of course, there are numerous advantages as well. The
language is functional, but is it developed enough to catch the
attention of the programming community as a whole?
<paraindent><param>left</param>----- Original Message -----</paraindent>
<paraindent><param>left</param><bold>From:</bold> Euler German</paraindent>
<paraindent><param>left</param><bold>Sent:</bold> Monday, February 11, 2002 5:16
PM</paraindent>
<paraindent><param>left</param><bold>To:</bold>EUforum</paraindent>
<paraindent><param>left</param><bold>Subject:</bold> Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects
(Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh
perspective?)</paraindent>
<paraindent><param>left</param></paraindent>
Hi Rod:
On 11 Feb 2002, at 12:28, Rod Jackson wrote:
>
>
> > > Junko and I just got tired of doing it.
> > > Actually, she wanted to keep going, but
> > > I wanted to spend less time at the print shop and the post office,
> > > and more time programming. Also, it seemed silly in this
> > > day and age to be shipping a bunch of paper half way
> > > around the world, when the information is available for
> > > free in electronic form, including hyper links.
> > >
> > I agree with you 100%. That is your job, what you know best. Please
> > don't do
> > anything else. What I'm trying to make others than you and me
understand is
> > that they could write about (Euphoria) what they know ! and make
money doing it.
> & gt; I'm sure you'll be very thankful if a textbook bring another
bunch of brand
> > new customers to your door, won't you?
>
> I've also thought of the need for (or simple convenience of) a book
> introducing programming via Euphoria, and Euphoria via programming.
I'm
> sure many others have too.
>
I can assure you that is!
> Perhaps the demand for this is growing. I don't exactly have much time
> myself right now, but if my article is received well, and no one else
> jumps at this, I might consider it myself. (Naturally, I'd be
interested
> in profiting from it, but another side of me would want to make it an
> e-book distributed freely with Eu. Hmm.)
>
>
That's the idea. You lead many fellows to Rob's door and Rob will share
part of
his gains with you. Nothing is simpler. Then another guy/girl may
consider
teach Euphoria other way and them we'll have a second book, and
another,! and
maybe O'Reilly can get int erest to publish something or maybe they are
just
tired of Perl... A book is also easier to translate into other
languages as the
difficult part is to show the idea, the core meaning. The rest you get
from
language reference. That's how things happens, but needs a first pebble
at the
pond to make waves!
> Rod Jackson
>
I want to publicly thank you for your reply. You gave me new hopes.
-- BR>
<FontFamily><param>Times New Roman</param><bigger>Get more from the Web. FREE
MSN Explorer download :
<underline><color><param>0000,0000,FF00</param>http://explorer.msn.com
5. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
On Tuesday 12 February 2002 03:25 am, encephalon1 at msn.com wrote:
> Do you think that Eu is far enough along in the development process,
> though? From browsing through this list for some time now, I have gathered
> that there are still a few features missing that make the language a little
> less 'competitive' than a few other more established language; of course,
> there are numerous advantages as well. The language is functional, but is
> it developed enough to catch the attention of the programming community as
> a whole?
No way. Compare it with Python, for example. Python was invented in 1990. Now
there are many books, and tens (or hundreds) of thousands of users, including
some significant projects at Google, Industrial Light+Magic, Four11, NASA.....
Euphoria isn't even in the running.
I am not a Python fan, I don't even like the language very much,
but the truth is the truth.
Regards,
Irv
6. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
- Posted by encephalon1 at msn.com
Feb 12, 2002
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3E5.1C953DF0
one thing Eu has is a dedicated group of supporters, as small as it may be. As
long as that continues, it can only grow,
and should catch on quite well when fully developed. I don't know much about
Python, but isn't it a kind of "special
purpose" language? I think Eu would be considered general purpose, and that
puts it in the same competition bracket as BASIC
(and all individual forms thereof) -- that language has been established for
longer than most languages out there now, and I
don't see it completely disappearing any time soon. If Eu had a very particular
advantage over other languages for a
specific purpose, it might catch on a lot faster.
----- Original Message -----
From: C. K. Lester
Subject: RE: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
> > Do you think that Eu is... developed enough to catch the
> > attention of the programming community as a whole?
>
> No way. Compare it with Python, for example. Python
> was invented in 1990. Now there are many books, and
> tens (or hundreds) of thousands of users, including
> some significant projects at Google, Industrial
> Light+Magic, Four11, NASA.....
>
> Euphoria isn't even in the running.
Irv, seems like you are suggesting that in order for a language to be
"in the running" requires that it have many books published about it and
many thousands of users, and some significant projects by high-quality
named corporations.
I'm guessing Python didn't have all those starting out in 1990, and look
where it is today. Sure, EUPHORIA was released in 1993, but it doesn't
have the "backing" that Python has.
Regardless, EUPHORIA is one of the best work horses out there.
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3E5.1C953DF0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<HTML><BODY STYLE="font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> </DIV> <DIV>one
thing Eu has is a dedicated group of
supporters, as small as it may be. As long as that continues, it can only
grow, and should catch on quite well when
fully developed. I don't know much about Python, but isn't it a kind of
"special purpose" language? I think Eu
would be considered general purpose, and that puts it in the same competition
bracket as BASIC (and all individual forms
thereof) -- that language has been established for longer than most languages
out there now, and I don't see it completely
disappearing any time soon. If Eu had a very particular advantage over
other languages for a specific purpose, it might
catch on a lot faster.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>----- Original Message
-----</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px;
PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4;
FONT: 10pt!
Arial; COLOR: black"><B>From:</B>
C. K. Lester</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt Arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February
12, 2002 3:40 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT:
10pt Arial"><B>To:</B> EUforum</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt
Arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE:
GOTO - A fresh perspective?)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>============ The Euphoria
Mailing List ============<BR><BR>> > Do
you think that Eu is... developed enough to catch the<BR>> > attention of
the programming community as a
whole?<BR>><BR>> No way. Compare it with Python, for example.
Python<BR>> was invented in 1990. Now there are many
books, and<BR>> tens (or hundreds) of thousands of users, including<BR>>
some significant projects at Google,
Industrial<BR>> Light+Magic, Four11, NASA.....<BR>><BR>> Euphoria isn't
even in the running.<BR><BR>Irv, seems like
you are suggesting that in order for a language to be<BR>"in the running"
requires that it have many books published about it
and<BR>many thousand!
s of users, and some significant p
rojects by high-quality<BR>named corporations.<BR><BR>I'm guessing Python didn't
have all those starting out in 1990, and
look<BR>where it is today. Sure, EUPHORIA was released in 1993, but it
doesn't<BR>have the "backing" that Python
has.<BR><BR>Regardless, EUPHORIA is one of the best work horses out
there.<BR><BR>==^================================================================<BR>This
email was sent to:
encephalon1 at msn.com<BR><BR>EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here:
http://topica.com/u/?b1dd66.b2PHWj<BR>Or send an email to:
EUforum-unsubscribe at topica.com<BR><BR>T O P I C A -- Register now to manage
your
mail!<BR>http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register<BR>==^================================================================<
href='http://explorer.msn.com'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3E5.1C953DF0--
7. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
On Tuesday 12 February 2002 03:24 pm, C. K. Lester wrote:
>
> > > Do you think that Eu is... developed enough to catch the
> > > attention of the programming community as a whole?
> >
> > No way. Compare it with Python, for example. Python
> > was invented in 1990. Now there are many books, and
> > tens (or hundreds) of thousands of users, including
> > some significant projects at Google, Industrial
> > Light+Magic, Four11, NASA.....
> >
> > Euphoria isn't even in the running.
>
> Irv, seems like you are suggesting that in order for a language to be
> "in the running" requires that it have many books published about it and
> many thousands of users, and some significant projects by high-quality
> named corporations.
Euphoria has had nearly as much time as Python to develop a following.
It hasn't. Euler's request was for a book about Euphoria, and I can't see
any publisher taking a chance on there being a market for a Euphoria book,
when there are so many much more popular languages out there to write about.
> I'm guessing Python didn't have all those starting out in 1990, and look
> where it is today. Sure, EUPHORIA was released in 1993, but it doesn't
> have the "backing" that Python has.
Python was started by one guy, just like Euphoria.
As far as I know, no money was spent to promote it.
If it now has more "backing" than Euphoria, why is that?
Why does O'Reilly publish books about Python?
Why do people pay for seminars and training classes in Python?
Apparently because a fairly large number of people find Python useful.
> Regardless, EUPHORIA is one of the best work horses out there.
Equally apparently, a much smaller number must find Euphoria useful,
otherwise we'd have the seminars and books as well.
Regards,
Irv
8. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
- Posted by encephalon1 at msn.com
Feb 12, 2002
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3F3.398B9B80
I don't believe he's claiming the Eu is a bad product, just that it doesn't have
the level of support to justify writing a book about it (in the publishers eyes).
I agree with him; I think more use would come of writing software which
showcases the abilities of Euphoria than writing a book that will go unpublished,
at least on paper. In my experience, people usually learn the basics of a
language before they buy a book about it. I think the documentation that comes
with the iterpreter, as well as this forum, is quite enough information and
support until there are more Eu programmers.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Smith
Subject: RE: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
Irv Mullins wrote:
> Euphoria has had nearly as much time as Python to develop a following.
> It hasn't. Euler's request was for a book about Euphoria, and I can't
> see
> any publisher taking a chance on there being a market for a Euphoria
> book,
> when there are so many much more popular languages out there to write
> about.
> > I'm guessing Python didn't have all those starting out in 1990, and look
> > where it is today. Sure, EUPHORIA was released in 1993, but it doesn't
> > have the "backing" that Python has.
>
> Python was started by one guy, just like Euphoria.
> As far as I know, no money was spent to promote it.
> If it now has more "backing" than Euphoria, why is that?
> Why does O'Reilly publish books about Python?
> Why do people pay for seminars and training classes in Python?
>
> Apparently because a fairly large number of people find Python useful.
>
> > Regardless, EUPHORIA is one of the best work horses out there.
>
> Equally apparently, a much smaller number must find Euphoria useful,
> otherwise we'd have the seminars and books as well.
There are two main reasons why Python is hugely successful and Euphoria
is not:
* Python is open source – although one guy is primarily responsible
many people do input into the language design and implementation.
The fact that it’s open source also develops a stronger feeling of
community and an increased level of participation. I’m not asking
Rob to open source Euphoria but if he did it would bring literally
hundreds of users aboard, of which maybe a dozen or so would
create/improve current libraries, produce more software, write
tutorials and books etc etc. Python has been lucky in the fact that
it has had commercial backing from the vert start. Python started
to help perform some business or educational task at a large
institution. The institution was generous enough to let the author
open source the project. Companies pay money for the author to
further develop the product. I can’t see any company doing this for
Euphoria. At least not in the short to medium term.
* Python is Object Oriented. It has a rich set of language features
and native data structures that make using Python for large multi
developer development easier. A lot of the little arguments that go
on here in the Euphoria world just aren’t issues in the Python world.
In Euphoria's defence it is small, fast and slim. Three words that
have never been mentioned about Python.
In the end if your not happy with Euphoria you can either help
make it better or go somewhere else. Everyone has a choice.
Ray Smith
http://www.geocities.com/ray_223
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3F3.398B9B80
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<HTML><BODY STYLE="font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I
don't believe he's claiming the Eu is a bad product, just that it doesn't have
the level of support to justify writing a book about it (in the publishers
eyes). I agree with him; I think more use would come of writing software
which showcases the abilities of Euphoria than writing a book that will go
unpublished, at least on paper. In my experience, people usually learn the
basics of a language before they buy a book about it. I think the
documentation that comes with the iterpreter, as well as this forum, is quite
enough information and support until there are more Eu programmers.</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt
Arial">----- Original Message -----</DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT:
10pt Arial; COLOR: black"><B>From:</B> Ray Smith</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt
Arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:22 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT:
10pt Arial"><B>To:</B> EUforum</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt
Arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh
perspective?)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>============ The Euphoria Mailing List
============<BR><BR><BR>Irv Mullins wrote:<BR><BR>> Euphoria has had nearly as
much time as Python to develop a following.<BR>> It hasn't. Euler's
request was for a book about Euphoria, and I can't<BR>> see<BR>> any
publisher taking a chance on there being a market for a Euphoria<BR>>
book,<BR>> when there are so many much more popular languages out there to
write<BR>> about.<BR><BR>> > I'm guessing Python didn't have all those
starting out in 1990, and look<BR>> > where it is today. Sure, EUPHORIA was
released in 1993, but it doesn't<BR>> > have the "backing" that Python
has.<BR>><BR>> Python was started by one guy, just like Euphoria.<BR>>
As f> ar as I know, no money was spent to promote it.<BR>> If it now has more
"backing" than Euphoria, why is that?<BR>> Why does O'Reilly publish books
about Python?<BR>> Why do people pay for seminars and training classes in
Python?<BR>><BR>> Apparently because a fairly large number of people find
Python useful.<BR>><BR>> > Regardless, EUPHORIA is one of the best work
horses out there.<BR>><BR>> Equally apparently, a much smaller number must
find Euphoria useful,<BR>> otherwise we'd have the seminars and books as
well.<BR><BR>There are two main reasons why Python is hugely successful and
Euphoria<BR>is not:<BR><BR>* Python is open source – although one guy is
primarily responsible<BR>many people do input into the language design and
implementation.<BR>The fact that it’s open source also develops a stronger
feeling of<BR>community and an increased level of participation. I’m not
asking<BR>Rob to open source Euphoria but if he did it would bring
literally<BR>hundreds of users aboard, of which maybe a dozen or so
would<BR>create/improve current libraries, produce more software,
write<BR>tutorials and books etc etc. Python has been lucky in the fact
that<BR>it has had commercial backing from the vert start. Python
started<BR>to help perform some business or educational task at a
large<BR>institution. The institution was generous enough to let the
author<BR>open source the project. Companies pay money for the author
to<BR>further develop the product. I can’t see any company doing this
for<BR>Euphoria. At least not in the short to medium term.<BR><BR>* Python
is Object Oriented. It has a rich set of language features<BR>and native
data structures that make using Python for large multi<BR>developer development
easier. A lot of the little arguments that go<BR>on here in the Euphoria
world just aren’t issues in the Python world.<BR><BR>In Euphoria's defence it
is small, fast and slim.
------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1B3F3.398B9B80--
9. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
- Posted by euman at bellsouth.net
Feb 12, 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: "C. K. Lester" <cklester at yahoo.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
>
> > Euphoria has had nearly as much time as Python to develop a
> > following. It hasn't.
>
> This cannot be blamed on the language, however. That's like saying the
> Amiga died because it was inferior to IBM DOS or Wintel boxes. WRONG!
> It's a little word called "marketing" and "sales." Oops, that's two
> words.
I've been following the issue of popularity for Euphoria and I say Rob
needs to take the girly colors out the Euphoria Website...
Set a few Spiders and Pitbulls out front and give the language (to the casual
observer)
the initial bad boy look...
Maybe post some cool graphic games out front and maybe some hacking tools
and waalah, instant success....
"My opinion" and the Girls on here need not respond to my girlish color example
above.....Im not changing my attitude...
Euman
euman at bellsouth.net
10. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
On Tuesday 12 February 2002 04:48 pm, encephalon1 at msn.com wrote:
> one thing Eu has is a dedicated group of supporters, as small as it may be.
> As long as that continues, it can only grow, and should catch on quite
> well when fully developed. I don't know much about Python, but isn't it a
> kind of "special purpose" language?
I don't use Python, but I'm planning to do so.
>From what I've seen so far, Python seems to be quite a bit
more complete than Euphoria.
It's more internet-friendly -
ftp, mail, http connections are dead simple.
it's object oriented, and has a real exception handling mechanism.
It is interactive, so you can try out code snippets from the command line.
If runs on Linux, Windows, DOS, OS/2, Mac, Amiga, maybe others.
You can see for yourself http://python.org
Regards,
Irv
11. Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:27 pm, C. K. Lester wrote:
> I'm not convinced that it's "better" than EUPHORIA. Maybe as an idea,
> you can explain (or point me to opinions) how programming Python apps
> for MS Windows would be easier/better/more efficient.
I didn't say it was better. I said it was more complete.
If I should need an app which can connect to a website, search for
some keyword(s) and download a page, I know that it can be done in
Python, with just a handful of lines of code, and it will work.
Can I say the same thing about Euphoria?
So, if my needs include anything to do with the internet, then, yes,
Python is better. Because it is more complete.
If I need to do some graphics, or a GUI, then objects (not the Euphoria kind)
make the task much easier.
Pascal has 'em, C++ has 'em, Python has 'em,
Euphoria doesn't. So which would be "better"?
Again, it's a matter of completeness.
If you want to see a list of organizations using Python for significant
projects, look here: http://www.python.org/psa/Users.html
But enough of this. I'm not promoting Python, I'm trying, unsuccessfully
it seems, to get Euphoria to grow into a complete programming language -
or at least one which can't be immediately discarded as inappropriate for
whatever task is at hand. I'm not the only one who has tried this, the
others just gave up and moved on long ago.
Regards,
Irv
