1. Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
Ok, so 2.5 will be 50/50 C/Eu, sounds fun, probably faster. My question is,
how is the 50% Eu code interpreted? Is is hand-coded IL or does 2.4 do the
interpretation? Given the latter, aren't we technically limiting ourselves
to 2.4?
~Greg
2. Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
Greg Haberek wrote:
> Ok, so 2.5 will be 50/50 C/Eu,
The Translator is 100% Euphoria.
Interpreter #1 is 100% Euphoria.
Interpreter #2 will be about 30% Euphoria, 70% C.
> sounds fun, probably faster. My question is,
> how is the 50% Eu code interpreted? Is is hand-coded IL or does 2.4 do the
> interpretation? Given the latter, aren't we technically limiting ourselves
> to 2.4?
I'll Translate the front-end Euphoria code to C,
and link it with the C-coded interpreter back-end
to make an interpreter .exe file. The IL will be passed
from front-end to back-end via memory.
We won't be tied to 2.4 at all.
I'm free to implement new Euphoria language features,
and once they are stable, I can use those
new features internally in the translator and
interpreter, if I want.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
3. Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
Rob wrote:
<snip>
> I'm free to implement new Euphoria language features,
> and once they are stable, I can use those
> new features internally in the translator and
> interpreter, if I want.
BTW: I'm very impressed by a Euphoria interpreter/translator
written in Euphoria itself.
It somehow reminds me of Baron Munchhausen, pulling himself
from the ocean by his own bootstraps. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Munchhausen
Regards,
Juergen
4. Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de>
To: <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
>
>
> Rob wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I'm free to implement new Euphoria language features,
> > and once they are stable, I can use those
> > new features internally in the translator and
> > interpreter, if I want.
>
> BTW: I'm very impressed by a Euphoria interpreter/translator
> written in Euphoria itself.
> It somehow reminds me of Baron Munchhausen, pulling himself
> from the ocean by his own bootstraps.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Munchhausen
>
I believe that's where the computer term "bootstrapping" came from.
--
Derek
5. Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
Derek wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Juergen Luethje"
<snip>
>> Rob wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> I'm free to implement new Euphoria language features,
>>> and once they are stable, I can use those
>>> new features internally in the translator and
>>> interpreter, if I want.
>>
>> BTW: I'm very impressed by a Euphoria interpreter/translator
>> written in Euphoria itself.
>> It somehow reminds me of Baron Munchhausen, pulling himself
>> from the ocean by his own bootstraps.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Munchhausen
>>
>
> I believe that's where the computer term "bootstrapping" came from.
Ah... interesting. Thanks Derek.
Regards,
Juergen
6. Re: Eu 2.4 vs Eu 2.5
Hi Juergen,
>
> Derek wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Juergen Luethje"
> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 8:26 PM
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Rob wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> I'm free to implement new Euphoria language features,
> >>> and once they are stable, I can use those
> >>> new features internally in the translator and
> >>> interpreter, if I want.
> >>
> >> BTW: I'm very impressed by a Euphoria interpreter/translator
> >> written in Euphoria itself.
> >> It somehow reminds me of Baron Munchhausen, pulling himself
> >> from the ocean by his own bootstraps.
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Munchhausen
> >>
> >
> > I believe that's where the computer term "bootstrapping" came from.
>
> Ah... interesting. Thanks Derek.
In Russian translation, Munchhausen pulls himself
by his own hairs, not bootstraps, and from bog,
not from ocean.
He was and is very popular in Russia.
But bootstraps were too fantastic even for such
popularity, I think.
These computer "terms" are just jargon words
and we never translate them literally. "Boot sector" is
only "loading sector" in Russian, "bug" is only "error"
or "mistake", "running" is only "execution" etc.
Russian text is longer because of that "officiality".
Good Russian computer literature is free of English
jargon and is very clear.
But there are many badly translated books too,
and there is Russian computer slang which consists
of deformed English and Russian words ... here ...
Munchhausen served in Russian army.
Learn Russian, EU guys, to be pulled
from the programming ocean by yourself 
Good Luck!
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
