1. Next Release: Euphoria 3.0, not 2.6
I believe the next release to be Euphoria v3.0,
because the release after v1.5 was v2.0.
Robert will need to follo
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ ___w that pattern from now on.
I have given Robert LOTS of feature & improvement ideas
(alot from OpenEU language spec, but many from myself).
Others have given many suggestions too. I would be happy
if he used only a few of them. The rest being enhancements,
internal changes/improvements, and bug fixes. Robert now
has what he needs to make strategic decisions for the major
release.
A standard library project is a very good idea. For features
that shouldnt be implemented in the language, but what people
still want (keep the language clean and simple). However that
is no excuse for Robert to slack off on developing a good
product for Euphoria v3.0.
_______ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
----------------------------------------------
2. Re: Next Release: Euphoria 3.0, not 2.6
Please excuse my previous post. I accidently pressed
"Send Now" before I was finished editing my post.
-----------------------------------------------------
I believe the next release to be Euphoria v3.0, because
the release after v1.5 was v2.0.
Robert will need to follow that pattern from now on.
I have given Robert LOTS of feature & improvement ideas
(alot from OpenEU language spec, but many from myself).
Others have given many suggestions too. I would be happy
if he used only a few of them, plus his own. The rest
being enhancements, internal changes/improvements, and
bug fixes. Robert now has what he needs to make strategic
decisions for the major release.
A standard library project is a very good idea. For features
that shouldnt be implemented in the language, but what people
still want (keep the language simple, clean, and small). However
that is no excuse for Robert to slack off on developing a good
products for v3.0.
I will switch to PureBasic and Java, if Euphoria v3.0 doesn't
satisfy me. So best of luck to Robert Craig and Junko C. Miura.
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ __________ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
3. Re: Next Release: Euphoria 3.0, not 2.6
Vincent wrote:
> I believe the next release to be Euphoria v3.0, because
> the release after v1.5 was v2.0.
>
> Robert will need to follow that pattern from now on.
> I have given Robert LOTS of feature & improvement ideas
> (alot from OpenEU language spec, but many from myself).
> Others have given many suggestions too. I would be happy
> if he used only a few of them, plus his own. The rest
> being enhancements, internal changes/improvements, and
> bug fixes. Robert now has what he needs to make strategic
> decisions for the major release.
>
> A standard library project is a very good idea. For features
> that shouldnt be implemented in the language, but what people
> still want (keep the language simple, clean, and small).
You are more than welcome to join the project. 
> However
> that is no excuse for Robert to slack off on developing a good
> products for v3.0.
That's true, of course. Several issues (such as forward referencing,
'continue' keyword and others) can't be addressed by a Standard Library.
> I will switch to PureBasic and Java, if Euphoria v3.0 doesn't
> satisfy me. So best of luck to Robert Craig and Junko C. Miura.
Imagine this:
In ten years or so, an enthusiastic newbie (I think most of us have been
enthusiasic when we were new to Euphoria.) posts on EUforum:
"Hi there, I'm new to Euphoria. In general I like the language, but I'm
missing a 'continue' keyword."
Who of us would want to go through that discussion the next ten yars?
Regards,
Juergen
4. Re: Next Release: Euphoria 3.0, not 2.6
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
Jul 07, 2005
-
Last edited Jul 08, 2005
Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
> You are more than welcome to join the project.
>
Thanks, I might just do that after I finish my game project.
If I for example was directing this project, I would establish five
general rules that would need to be observed while developing this
library:
1) Keep things organized by seperating routines, variables, constants
by catagory. Each catagory would have it's own include file. Exa:
Timer.e, PPrint.e, Hash.e, FileO.e, AdvMath.e, Bits.e, so on.
2) Always strive for platform independence. In this case try to make
all the routines work for all supported platforms: DOS, Windows,
Linux, and FreeBSD. Try hard to limit exceptions on this.
3) Keep things relative. Only incorperate things that would be practical
in a standard library. Don't go and incorporate the wrappers for SDL,
Morfit, OpenGL, Bass, etc. In fact, as a general rule of thumb, limit
implementeing any sort of wrapped routines... preferibly, avoiding it
completely. But exceptions like wrapping Win32's API high precision
timer routines do exist.
4) Ensure high efficency and optimization for all the algorithms. We want
the least amount of overhead, and the most speed as possible, when using
the library. Rule #1 also helps in this aspect by keeping the size of
the include files small.
5) Documentation, this is perhaps the most time consuming part. But like
any other library, knowing what the routines do, and how to use them is
key to making use of it. The concept in which RDS follows with their
reference manual: title, platform, syntax, and description is very
desirable. HTM format would make it professional looking, but RichText
format would be adequate enough.
Now I of course have no jurisdiction over this, but following a guideline like
this should ensure an elegent standard library in the end, that all Euphoria
users would appreciate.
If I helped out, I would personally follow the first four guidelines/rules.
Leaving the fifth for someone else, becuase I'm no good at documentation.
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ __________ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
----------------------------------------------
5. Re: Next Release: Euphoria 3.0, not 2.6
On 7 Jul 2005, at 10:35, Vincent wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
>
> Please excuse my previous post. I accidently pressed
> "Send Now" before I was finished editing my post.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> I believe the next release to be Euphoria v3.0, because
> the release after v1.5 was v2.0.
>
> Robert will need to follow that pattern from now on.
> I have given Robert LOTS of feature & improvement ideas
> (alot from OpenEU language spec, but many from myself).
> Others have given many suggestions too. I would be happy
> if he used only a few of them, plus his own. The rest
> being enhancements, internal changes/improvements, and
> bug fixes. Robert now has what he needs to make strategic
> decisions for the major release.
RobC pretty much doesn't listen to what people want. Many really good folks
have left this language because, while it has potential as a growing language,
it has no potential when following RobC's "vision". The "vision" has no room
for things not already there. We haveto jump thru a lot of hoops sometimes
to make things work, hoops which are simply not there in other languages.
The bright star of Eu is sequences, but nearly everything else about the
language must be re-written by each new coder until they can find something
in the archives that might work.
> A standard library project is a very good idea. For features
> that shouldnt be implemented in the language, but what people
> still want (keep the language simple, clean, and small). However
> that is no excuse for Robert to slack off on developing a good
> products for v3.0.
>
> I will switch to PureBasic and Java, if Euphoria v3.0 doesn't
> satisfy me. So best of luck to Robert Craig and Junko C. Miura.
I don't blame you. PureBasic has all the things Bliss/Bach has, plus all the
many things people here have requested from RDS, and more! I wonder if i
can go back to life without sequences.....
But what about execution speed?
PureBasic doesn't run on plain dos, but does run on Amigas,, hmm.
Kat
