1. RE: The Perfect Solution
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Oct 19, 2004
-
Last edited Oct 20, 2004
Matt Lewis wrote:
<SNIP>
> What's wrong with the includes that come with Euphoria? If this is such
> a great problem, why have I noticed only 2 people mention this (you and
> Mr Bensler)? Why should we change *our* hobbies (or work--I often use
> Eu at work) to please you?
For your information, the issue of creating a new standardized library
set is YEARS old. And there are MANY people who agree. YOU may not be
one of them, and that's fine, but the general attitude of this community
is like Jason implied. Ignore all progress for the sake of preserving
old code.
A sourceforge project was even started before. They probably gave up
because they could see that nobody would accept the changes they wanted
to make.
<SNIP>
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
2. RE: The Perfect Solution
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Oct 19, 2004
-
Last edited Oct 20, 2004
Matt Lewis wrote:
<SNIP>
> If one is truly
> superior, chances are that most people will use that one (assuming it
> meets their needs). Does that mean that we should all delete the other
> one from our hard drives?
You don't have to do anything. Nobody is forcing you to change anything.
However I am being forced to change all of my filenames. Thank you very
much.
Instead, I will likely write my own preprocessor for my libs, and
abandon compatability with official RDS code. That will solve the
problem.
Then we will have a complete fork of the Euphoria commmunity, and those
who choose to, can stay with RDS and their perpetual hacks.
Perhaps I would provide compatability solutions, for a price.
<SNIP>
> Most people
> around here put a lot of 'hobby' time in on Euphoria, and probably don't
>
> consider it wasted time.
How many is most people around here Matt? For that matter, how many
users of Euphoria are there, period?
Consider the fact that there is only about 100 active members of
euphoria community. Possibly 5,000 regular users, that we don't hear
about. And that is being generous to RDS, I beleive.
Consider the fact that there is only about 2000 contributions in the
Euphoria archives, after 10 years of life as a language.
I have probably written more code, single handedly, than is is all of
the RDS archives.
Consider the fact that commercial software written with Euphoria is
virtually non-existent.
Now tell me, does the majority opinion of this Euphoria community
reflect the best interests of Euphoria? I think no.
You produce some great things Matt, I can't deny that. But just because
RDS has established some crappy libraries as standards, doesn't mean we
have to live with them for eternity.
<SNIP>
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
3. RE: The Perfect Solution
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Oct 19, 2004
-
Last edited Oct 20, 2004
Pete Lomax wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:00:29 +0000, Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
> wrote:
>
> >A sourceforge project was even started before. They probably gave up
> >because they could see that nobody would accept the changes they wanted
> >to make.
> LOL, See
> http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/posdiff.htm
>
> So many people will run away screaming, but I reckon good riddance 
>
> Pete
>
I've seen it before Pete :)
Posetf has lots of things going for it.
However, see general my comments at:
http://empire.iwireweb.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=157&st=0&#entry197
Particularly, point #1
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
4. RE: The Perfect Solution
Chris Bensler wrote:
<SNIP>
> How many is most people around here Matt? For that matter, how many
> users of Euphoria are there, period?
>
> Consider the fact that there is only about 100 active members of
> euphoria community. Possibly 5,000 regular users, that we don't hear
> about. And that is being generous to RDS, I beleive.
>
> Consider the fact that there is only about 2000 contributions in the
> Euphoria archives, after 10 years of life as a language.
> I have probably written more code, single handedly, than is is all of
> the RDS archives.
>
> Consider the fact that commercial software written with Euphoria is
> virtually non-existent.
I forgot to mention the fact that there is essentially no other websites
for Euphoria programmers. Other than a handful of mainly personal
programmers pages, and a few (strongy opposed I might add) attempts to
provides users with alternatives to RDS's monopoly.
Why do you think this situation exists, and how do you figure that is
healthy?
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
5. RE: The Perfect Solution
Chris Bensler wrote:
>
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> > What's wrong with the includes that come with Euphoria? If this is such
> > a great problem, why have I noticed only 2 people mention this (you and
> > Mr Bensler)? Why should we change *our* hobbies (or work--I often use
> > Eu at work) to please you?
>
> For your information, the issue of creating a new standardized library
> set is YEARS old. And there are MANY people who agree. YOU may not be
> one of them, and that's fine, but the general attitude of this community
> is like Jason implied. Ignore all progress for the sake of preserving
> old code.
> A sourceforge project was even started before. They probably gave up
> because they could see that nobody would accept the changes they wanted
> to make.
Yes, I recall that project. There was some interest, but obviously not
enough. There were probably other reasons that people wouldn't accept
the changes than 'the sake of preserving old code.'
> > If one is truly
> > superior, chances are that most people will use that one (assuming it
> > meets their needs). Does that mean that we should all delete the other
> > one from our hard drives?
> You don't have to do anything. Nobody is forcing you to change anything.
> However I am being forced to change all of my filenames. Thank you very
> much.
You're welcome. You missed the point of Jason's post. He was upset that
there were multiple libraries for similar tasks. Look, I fully agree that
the current file name implementation is flawed. It seems nearly trivial
to use canonical file names, although I could see situations where this
could cause problems if multiple copies/files existed in multiple places
in the include search path.
> Instead, I will likely write my own preprocessor for my libs, and
> abandon compatability with official RDS code. That will solve the
> problem.
>
> Then we will have a complete fork of the Euphoria commmunity, and those
> who choose to, can stay with RDS and their perpetual hacks.
>
> Perhaps I would provide compatability solutions, for a price.
Yay. No one has really explained here what is wrong with the standard
include files provided by RDS. We've been discussing lots of stuff about
the interpreter itself. Frankly, if you're replacing the standard files
and are interested in sharing, you probably *should* rename them to
prevent confusion. Also, IIRC, the project to create some standard
includes was focused on extending the standard includes to include the
most common sort of things that many people use.
> But just because RDS has established some crappy libraries as
> standards, doesn't mean we have to live with them for eternity.
I have never said that. I've asked *why* they're crappy. And I'm happy
to look at alternatives to what we have, just like I look at other
alternatives to all the libraries I use. If you've really got a better
mousetrap, I'd like to see it. Until then, it's just vaporware and
your arguments probably aren't going to sway many people.
> I forgot to mention the fact that there is essentially no other websites
> for Euphoria programmers. Other than a handful of mainly personal
> programmers pages, and a few (strongy opposed I might add) attempts to
> provides users with alternatives to RDS's monopoly.
>
> Why do you think this situation exists, and how do you figure that is
> healthy?
I think that the community just isn't that big. There is really no
justification for another commercial web site. So it's left to the
users. I know I don't have a lot of time (or the interest) to put up
much more than what I have on the web.
What are these 'strongly opposed' attempts at breaking RDS's monopoly.
There have been a few message board attempts, and there are several
people working on an open source implementation of Euphoria.
The message boards go away because they're not as useful as this forum.
Some people like to get their messages by email. There is a much wider
user base for this forum than the others (a chicken and the egg scenario).
It's easier to check one source than many. That doesn't stop people from
using them, but it also doesn't mean that they're strongly opposed. Yes,
it does help that this is the Official forum, but it's not like Rob
censors people (at least not on-topic messages).
Frankly, I'm for more choices. I don't understand why you think
otherwise.
Matt Lewis
6. RE: The Perfect Solution
- Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at nt.net>
Oct 22, 2004
-
Last edited Oct 23, 2004
codepilot Gmail Account wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:00:55 -0700, Matt Lewis <guest at rapideuphoria.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > posted by: Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at yahoo.com>
> >
> > Chris Bensler wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Matt Lewis wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > What are these 'strongly opposed' attempts at breaking RDS's monopoly.
>
> Can someone tell me why there are so many 'strongly opposed' attempts
> at breaking RDS's monopoly. After all RDS did make euphoria, to start
> with and has gathered the croud thats here, listened(maybe no
> implemented) to suggestions. I'm personally very satisfied, and all
> the changes I've seen so far are probably place for pre-processors and
> DIY libraries. But the changes that can only be made to the
> interpreter, well they should be made to the interpreter, all of them.
> But certainly not the public or registered version, everyone that has
> been voicing there opions about changes SHOULD licence the source, and
> make them, themselves. If the changes make a huge impression then they
> will probably be added.
>
> -Its late and I'm voicing my opinions, but hey I got the source and
> make the changes I like to it myself.
>
> Daniel
>
> > There have been a few message board attempts, and there are several
> > people working on an open source implementation of Euphoria.
> >
> > The message boards go away because they're not as useful as this forum.
> > Some people like to get their messages by email. There is a much wider
> > user base for this forum than the others (a chicken and the egg
> > scenario).
> > It's easier to check one source than many. That doesn't stop people
> > from
> > using them, but it also doesn't mean that they're strongly opposed.
> > Yes,
> > it does help that this is the Official forum, but it's not like Rob
> > censors people (at least not on-topic messages).
> >
> > Frankly, I'm for more choices. I don't understand why you think
> > otherwise.
> >
> > Matt Lewis
> >
> >
If I pay for the source code, so that I can affect change to the
euphoria language, I won't be sharing my improvements for free.
ESPECIALLY with RDS, who was so bold as to CHARGE me to try and help
them in the first place.
That is not attitude to make. "Everyone should just buy a copy of the
source and make their own changes."
No way, that doesn't jive with me. I'm not interested in wasting money
on the source code for an interpreter.
Besides people have tried that. Rob is just as stubborn. And the
community won't even give those alternates a chances, mainly because the
mod versions are crippled. As in no registered features.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
