1. Decision on . or :
Derek Parnell wrote:
> You feel that '.' stands out more in text. I feel that ':' stands out more.
> Who is right and does it really matter?
The only reason it matters is because . was brought up in favor from many
people, discussion started and no final decision was made. I am just trying to
exhaust the discussion so a final decision can be made and we are not talking
over this same topic two years from now.
Some may think I am pushing quite a bit, but I am just wanting final resolution.
If we are to get anywhere with Euphoria, we have to start making decisions. Not
discuss a topic until one side is tired an retreats for a bit.
It seems that those on IRC and others who have talked w/me about the . instead
of : have had their say and have no further arguments.
We have heard mainly from those opposing the . in favor of : ... I am going to
step aside and I would like to propose that anyone who wishes for the . over the
: speak up on this post. If no viable arguments exist for . over : in one weeks
time, then we close the discussion and : stays.
This is the first time I've called for a vote in this manner, so if anyone
thinks it is unfair, please speak up as well. All I know is we need to come to a
decision some time 
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
2. Re: Decision on . or :
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> This is the first time I've called for a vote in this manner, so if anyone
> thinks it is unfair, please
> speak up as well. All I know is we need to come to a decision some time
I think you are doing a wonderful job and I applaud the approach you are taking.
I'm sure there are some rough edges to it but overall I think you are going about
things the right way. Well done, Jeremy.
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Skype name: derek.j.parnell
3. Re: Decision on . or :
Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> > This is the first time I've called for a vote in this manner, so if anyone
> thinks it is unfair, please</font></i>
> > speak up as well. All I know is we need to come to a decision some time
>
> I think you are doing a wonderful job and I applaud the approach you are
> taking.
> I'm sure there are some rough edges to it but overall I think you are going
> about things the right way. Well done, Jeremy.
Ditto.
Kat
4. Re: Decision on . or :
Kat wrote:
> Derek Parnell wrote:
> > I think you are doing a wonderful job and I applaud the approach you are
> > taking.
> > I'm sure there are some rough edges to it but overall I think you are going
> > about things the right way. Well done, Jeremy.
> Ditto.
Ditto. :)
5. Re: Decision on . or :
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> We have heard mainly from those opposing the . in favor of : ... I am going
> to step aside and I would like to propose that anyone who wishes for the .
> over
> the : speak up on this post. If no viable arguments exist for . over : in one
> weeks time, then we close the discussion and : stays.
Hehe then I will speak up here for voting for the dot.
Remember that we will use namespace crazier than ever due to the new stdlib.
Maybe about a third to half of the lines will have keywords with namespacing.
Another approach is we enable both . and : then deprecate one of them
on the next major version (Eu 5.0). In PHP 4, to get a character from a string
[] can be used. But in PHP 5 [] is deprecated (but can be used) and {}
is encouraged to be used. However people still uses [] so in PHP 6 the {}
is deprecated and [] is encouraged back :D
So if we enable : and . for Eu 4, we can see which is more used and deprecate
one of them in Eu 5. How do you think?
6. Re: Decision on . or :
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > Derek Parnell wrote:
> > > I think you are doing a wonderful job and I applaud the approach you are
> > > taking.
> > > I'm sure there are some rough edges to it but overall I think you are
> > > going
> > > about things the right way. Well done, Jeremy.
> > Ditto.
>
> Ditto. :)
Ditto. 
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
7. Re: Decision on . or :
I was originally in favor of '.' over ':' (especially with allowing both but
deprecating ':').
Having read many well-though-out comments, however, I move my vote to retaining
':'. Euphoria may never get objects or "structured" sequences. And even if it
does, I stay on the side of removing ambiguity in the source.
The argument that reading and maintaining source trumps ease of typing are very
convincing.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
8. Re: Decision on . or :
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> I was originally in favor of '.' over ':' (especially with allowing both but
> deprecating ':').
>
> Having read many well-though-out comments, however, I move my vote to
> retaining
> ':'. Euphoria may never get objects or "structured" sequences. And even if it
> does, I stay on the side of removing ambiguity in the source.
>
> The argument that reading and maintaining source trumps ease of typing are
> very
> convincing.
I was going to say this but you said it better.
So, ditto. :)
9. Re: Decision on . or :
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> We have heard mainly from those opposing the . in favor of : ... I am going
> to step aside and I would like to propose that anyone who wishes for the .
> over
> the : speak up on this post. If no viable arguments exist for . over : in one
> weeks time, then we close the discussion and : stays.
>
Ya!!! :)
The IRC meeting was something I by chance heard about. The meeting was
announced
in a post a few minutes before the meeting started. I think the group of
EUPHORIA
programmers at the IRC meeting was not representative to those who post on the
forums. There were only six people in the meeting and most seemed relatively
new
at EUPHORIA. It seems to me, that people who come from a python, C++ or Java
background look at EUPHORIA's ':' delimiter and namespace and say 'how strange.'
To me, it is okay if EUPHORIA is different. Rob wants to let EUPHORIA grow into
something more. We could add all kinds of C++ kinds of things to EUPHORIA, and
keep changing it until will we have a non-ANSI compliant C++ compiler or we
could add features that do not exist in the other languages with a little
imagination.
The least interesting thing we can do is to change the syntax to look more like
java, python or c++.
Finally, I have to agree that a volunteer who has enough time on their hands
to think about changing ':' to '.' could be an aggregator. He could take all
the message contents and make a document about various threads that includes
other people's point of view so we do not
keep asking the same questions after so many months. We ask everyone to read
the "mutate EUPHORIA article" in the wiki page before asking or proposing
changes.
Shawn Pringle
10. Re: Decision on . or :
Shawn Pringle wrote:
<snip>
> We ask everyone to read
> the "mutate EUPHORIA article" in the wiki page before asking or proposing
> changes.
Got url?
Kat
11. Re: Decision on . or :
Kat wrote:
>
> Shawn Pringle wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > We ask everyone to read
> > the "mutate EUPHORIA article" in the wiki page before asking or proposing
> > changes.
>
> Got url?
>
> Kat
The bad news first all the relavant content of this thread needs to
be merged into a summary and put up before you can read it. I can host
a site for static content if someone wants to summarize it.
Shawn Pringle
12. Re: Decision on . or :
Hi
Jeremy - yes you are doing a good job,even though all of us may not agree with
you (or anyone else for that matter)
I vote to keep the : and not use the . .
_Personally_ I don't like namespaces (although that may change), and will
probably write a stdlib wrapper for my own personal use, using underscore
notatation so that I don't have too think about it too much.
However keep up the good work.
Chris
13. Re: Decision on . or :
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > I was originally in favor of '.' over ':' (especially with allowing both but
> > deprecating ':').
> >
> > Having read many well-though-out comments, however, I move my vote to
> > retaining
> > ':'. Euphoria may never get objects or "structured" sequences. And even if
> > it
> > does, I stay on the side of removing ambiguity in the source.
> >
> > The argument that reading and maintaining source trumps ease of typing are
> > very
> > convincing.
>
> I was going to say this but you said it better.
>
> So, ditto. :)
I vote for :
PeteS
14. Re: Decision on . or :
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > Derek Parnell wrote:
> > > I think you are doing a wonderful job and I applaud the approach you are
> > > taking.
> > > I'm sure there are some rough edges to it but overall I think you are
> > > going
> > > about things the right way. Well done, Jeremy.
> > Ditto.
>
> Ditto. :)
Hear Hear! :)
15. Re: Decision on . or :
> On 6 May 2008 at 19:51, c.k.lester wrote (maybe snipped):
> Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > I was originally in favor of '.' over ':' (especially with allowing both but
> > deprecating ':').
> >
> > Having read many well-though-out comments, however, I move my vote to
> > retaining
> > ':'. Euphoria may never get objects or "structured" sequences. And even if
> > it
> > does, I stay on the side of removing ambiguity in the source.
> >
> > The argument that reading and maintaining source trumps ease of typing are
> > very
> > convincing.
>
> I was going to say this but you said it better.
>
> So, ditto. :)
>
Same here.
And you are doing an awesome job, Jeremy. You have my bowing.
--
_
_| euler f german
_| sete lagoas, mg, brazil
_| efgerman{AT}gmail{DOT}com
16. Re: Decision on . or :
Shawn Pringle wrote:
>
> The IRC meeting was something I by chance heard about. The meeting was
> announced
> in a post a few minutes before the meeting started.
It was actually posted a day in advanced. When the meeting started, I posted a
message again letting everyone know it started. But, you are right, a day notice
was not enough. However, the meeting was prefixed with the fact that this is the
first time, not much notice was given and that the meeting was in no way binding,
that it was more of a trial run.
> I think the group of EUPHORIA
> programmers at the IRC meeting was not representative to those who post on the
>
> forums. There were only six people in the meeting and most seemed relatively
> new
> at EUPHORIA. It seems to me, that people who come from a python, C++ or Java
>
> background look at EUPHORIA's ':' delimiter and namespace and say 'how
> strange.'
I do not think this is the case. The people who were speaking about . were long
time Euphoria programmers.
> The least interesting thing we can do is to change the syntax to look more
> like
> java, python or c++.
The goal was not to change it to look like another language.
> Finally, I have to agree that a volunteer who has enough time on their hands
> to think about changing ':' to '.' could be an aggregator. He could take all
>
> the message contents and make a document about various threads that includes
> other people's point of view so we do not
> keep asking the same questions after so many months. We ask everyone to read
> the "mutate EUPHORIA article" in the wiki page before asking or proposing
> changes.
The discussion had to start to even know the pros/cons. Also, who has time? To
change : or a . is a 10 second job in the backend. That's no time requirement.
All it needed was discussion, which it got.
Now, I said I was not going to talk about . any more, and I am not. The
statements above were to justify the steps taken prior to and after the irc
meeting in question.
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
17. Re: Decision on . or :
I VOTE FOR :
Bernie
My files in archive:
WMOTOR, XMOTOR, W32ENGIN, MIXEDLIB, EU_ENGIN, WIN32ERU, WIN32API
Can be downloaded here:
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=bernie+ryan
18. Re: Decision on . or :
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> I do not think this is the case. The people who were speaking about . were
> long
> time Euphoria programmers.
i take "long time Euphoria programmers" as a compliment and vote for :
Yours, OtterDad
Don't sweat it -- it's not real life. It's only ones and zeroes. Gene Spafford
19. Re: Decision on . or :
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> Derek Parnell wrote:
> > You feel that '.' stands out more in text. I feel that ':' stands out more.
> > Who is right and does it really matter?
>
...
> This is the first time I've called for a vote in this manner, so if anyone
> thinks it is unfair, please
> speak up as well. All I know is we need to come to a decision some time
What about '..', it will keep the dot camp happy, and the colon camp will be
happy if they tilt their head to the side.
Seriously, just joking. I don't mind either way. I use . in Python and :: in
Perl namespacing. It still takes me 10 minutes to stop putting semicolons at the
end of each statement in Euphoria :).
Your brain adapts to whichever language you are writing in, so whatever
conventions are used come back to you and become second nature after a while.
Gary
