1. RE: Language Design
I agree wholeheartedly.
Regards.
----- Original Message -----
From: Derek Parnell <guest at RapidEuphoria.com>
To: <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: OT: Language Design
>
>
> posted by: Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
>
> This is a quote I can relate to...
>
> "There is one thing more important than brevity to a hacker: being able
> to do what you want. In the history of programming languages a
> surprising amount of effort has gone into preventing programmers from
> doing things considered to be improper. This is a dangerously
> presumptuous plan. How can the language designer know what the
> programmer is going to need to do? I think language designers would do
> better to consider their target user to be a genius who will need to do
> things they never anticipated, rather than a bumbler who needs to be
> protected from himself. The bumbler will shoot himself in the foot
> anyway. You may save him from referring to variables in another package,
> but you can't save him from writing a badly designed program to solve
> the wrong problem, and taking forever to do it."
>
> http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html
>
>
> --
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
>
>
>
>
2. RE: Language Design
On 28 May 2004, at 1:53, Ricardo Forno wrote:
>
>
> I agree wholeheartedly.
So is that TWO votes in favor of "goto" in Eu ?
Kat
> Regards.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Derek Parnell <guest at RapidEuphoria.com>
> To: <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 10:27 PM
> Subject: OT: Language Design
>
>
> > posted by: Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
> >
> > This is a quote I can relate to...
> >
> > "There is one thing more important than brevity to a hacker: being able
> > to do what you want. In the history of programming languages a
> > surprising amount of effort has gone into preventing programmers from
> > doing things considered to be improper. This is a dangerously
> > presumptuous plan. How can the language designer know what the
> > programmer is going to need to do? I think language designers would do
> > better to consider their target user to be a genius who will need to do
> > things they never anticipated, rather than a bumbler who needs to be
> > protected from himself. The bumbler will shoot himself in the foot
> > anyway. You may save him from referring to variables in another package,
> > but you can't save him from writing a badly designed program to solve
> > the wrong problem, and taking forever to do it."
> >
> > http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html
> >
> >
> > --
> > Derek Parnell
> > Melbourne, Australia
> >
> >
>
>
>
3. RE: Language Design
Kat wrote:
>
> On 28 May 2004, at 1:53, Ricardo Forno wrote:
>
> >
> > I agree wholeheartedly.
>
> So is that TWO votes in favor of "goto" in Eu ?
>
Well...I won't actually object to it being included, but just
don't expect me to ever use it, or to trust a program that
does use it 
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
4. RE: Language Design
Derek Parnell in response to:
> Kat wrote:
> >
> > On 28 May 2004, at 1:53, Ricardo Forno wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I agree wholeheartedly.
> >
> > So is that TWO votes in favor of "goto" in Eu ?
> >
>
> Well...I won't actually object to it being included, but just
> don't expect me to ever use it, or to trust a program that
> does use it
>
> --
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
>
Nor would I choose to help to debug such a program...
-- Brian
(just my 1ยข)
5. RE: Language Design
Brian Broker wrote:
>
>
> Derek Parnell in response to:
> > Kat wrote:
> > >
> > > On 28 May 2004, at 1:53, Ricardo Forno wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree wholeheartedly.
> > >
> > > So is that TWO votes in favor of "goto" in Eu ?
> > >
> >
> > Well...I won't actually object to it being included, but just
> > don't expect me to ever use it, or to trust a program that
> > does use it
I would support it only if it had a corresponding "goaway"
--"ask about our layaway plan".
--
