1. Euphoria and Windows
- Posted by g.malagnini at tin.it Jun 04, 2003
- 397 views
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C32AB6.F0E79870 charset="iso-8859-1" Windows and Euphoria=20 Being Euphoria programming system strategically oriented to support = itself as multi platform product, it cannot provide and support = features that, even if capable of improving the effectiveness of the = program for one platform, cannot provide same results for the other = supported platforms. This is the case of Windows, where since years external developers had = to propose to the user community additional features to complete, = improve and optimise the possibilities offered by Euphoria. The major examples are the editor, the Win32Lib and the IDE. According with my understanding the situation is today much better than = a couple of years ago: - the Euphoria project team addresses in a more direct way Windows users = to utilize the mentioned features. - Win32Lib and IDE have become products that groups of developers = support, assuring the continuity of the old code and its updating with = the proposal coming from several sources. This is a good result, but I would propose to extend the efforts to = provide an even more suitable product for the Windows oriented = developers, especially for the new ones. Even if, as I mentioned before, the situation is significantly improved = today, the new user has still to=20 cope with a set of problems before deciding if Euphoria is a good = solution for him in the Windows environment: - he has to download three products, with separated documentations to = evaluate (part of it can be printed, part is available on line only, = terms can slightly differ sometime). - these products are first installed separately; then the problem of how = to merge them comes up. - All products have a set of libraries, to be merged somehow - three different editors are available, leaving up to the user to = decide which one to use - the three products will provide new releases independently each other, = leaving some concerns to the user for the compatibility problem and the = likely different updating procedures - ............. My proposal is the following: the three project teams should agree to = make a unique Windows Euphoria package available for the interested = users. One of these teams (or a fourth one, if they prefer) should be = responsible to merge the three complementary product in one, avoid any = duplication (one installation and updating procedure, one installation = environment, one set of documentation, only the most suitable editor, = etc.), and to test it for the distribution. This could be compared with the existing packages of "Linux = distribution." This would certainly would assure to the potentially users an easier = product evaluation, an almost immediate test of its capabilities, an = higher degree of acceptance and, as consequence, a fast expansion of = Euphoria. Best regards Gianfranco Malagnini ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C32AB6.F0E79870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2726.2500" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Windows and Euphoria </FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Being Euphoria programming system = strategically=20 oriented to support itself as multi platform product, it cannot = provide=20 and support features that, even if capable of improving the = effectiveness=20 of the program for one platform, cannot provide same results for = the other=20 supported platforms.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This is the case of Windows, where = since years=20 external developers had to propose to the user community additional = features to=20 complete, improve and optimise the possibilities offered by=20 Euphoria.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The major examples are the editor, the = Win32Lib and=20 the IDE.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>According with my understanding the = situation is=20 today much better than a couple of years ago:<BR>- the Euphoria project = team=20 addresses in a more direct way Windows users to utilize the mentioned=20 features.<BR>- Win32Lib and IDE have become products that groups of = developers=20 support, assuring the continuity of the old code and its updating with = the=20 proposal coming from several sources.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This is a good result, but I would = propose to=20 extend the efforts to provide an even more suitable product for the = Windows=20 oriented developers, especially for the new ones.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Even if, as I mentioned before, the = situation is=20 significantly improved today, the new user has still to <BR>cope with a = set of=20 problems before deciding if Euphoria is a good solution for him in the = Windows=20 environment:<BR>- he has to download three products, with separated=20 documentations to evaluate (part of it can be printed, part is available = on line=20 only, terms can slightly differ sometime).<BR>- these products are first = installed separately; then the problem of how to merge them comes = up.<BR>- All=20 products have a set of libraries, to be merged somehow<BR>- three = different=20 editors are available, leaving up to the user to decide which one to = use<BR>-=20 the three products will provide new releases independently each other, = leaving=20 some concerns to the user for the compatibility problem and the likely = different=20 updating procedures<BR>- .............</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My proposal is the following: the three = project=20 teams should agree to make a unique Windows Euphoria package available = for the=20 interested users.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One of these teams (or a fourth one, if = they=20 prefer) should be responsible to merge the three complementary product = in one,=20 avoid any duplication (one installation and updating procedure, = one=20 installation environment, one set of documentation, only the most = suitable=20 editor, etc.), and to test it for the distribution.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This could be compared with the = existing packages=20 of "Linux distribution."</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>This would certainly would assure to = the=20 potentially users an easier product evaluation, an almost immediate test = of its=20 capabilities, an higher degree of acceptance and, as consequence, a fast = expansion of Euphoria.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Best regards</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Gianfranco=20 ------=_NextPart_000_006A_01C32AB6.F0E79870--
2. Re: Euphoria and Windows
- Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com> Jun 06, 2003
- 383 views
----- Original Message ----- From: <g.malagnini at tin.it> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com> Subject: Euphoria and Windows > > Windows and Euphoria > > Being Euphoria programming system strategically oriented to support itself as multi platform product, it cannot provide and support features that, even if capable of improving the effectiveness of the program for one platform, cannot provide same results for the other supported platforms. > > This is the case of Windows, where since years external developers had to propose to the user community additional features to complete, improve and optimise the possibilities offered by Euphoria. > > The major examples are the editor, the Win32Lib and the IDE. > > According with my understanding the situation is today much better than a couple of years ago: > - the Euphoria project team addresses in a more direct way Windows users to utilize the mentioned features. > - Win32Lib and IDE have become products that groups of developers support, assuring the continuity of the old code and its updating with the proposal coming from several sources. > > This is a good result, but I would propose to extend the efforts to provide an even more suitable product for the Windows oriented developers, especially for the new ones. > > Even if, as I mentioned before, the situation is significantly improved today, the new user has still to > cope with a set of problems before deciding if Euphoria is a good solution for him in the Windows environment: > - he has to download three products, with separated documentations to evaluate (part of it can be printed, part is available on line only, terms can slightly differ sometime). > - these products are first installed separately; then the problem of how to merge them comes up. > - All products have a set of libraries, to be merged somehow > - three different editors are available, leaving up to the user to decide which one to use > - the three products will provide new releases independently each other, leaving some concerns to the user for the compatibility problem and the likely different updating procedures > - ............. > > My proposal is the following: the three project teams should agree to make a unique Windows Euphoria package available for the interested users. > > One of these teams (or a fourth one, if they prefer) should be responsible to merge the three complementary product in one, avoid any duplication (one installation and updating procedure, one installation environment, one set of documentation, only the most suitable editor, etc.), and to test it for the distribution. > > This could be compared with the existing packages of "Linux distribution." > > This would certainly would assure to the potentially users an easier product evaluation, an almost immediate test of its capabilities, an higher degree of acceptance and, as consequence, a fast expansion of Euphoria. > No doubt that this is all good and true. But the cost in terms of commitment, time, and cash makes it difficult to justify the amount of work needed to establish and maintain such an organised effort. The work would not be spread around too many people who could absorb it. Current we have a few individuals who are working in their (all too short) spare time. What organisation would be prepared to take on the coordination? RDS? Not likely - Euphoria is too time consuming as it is for them. Some other group - for absolutely no reward - not likely. Still, we can hope for a White Knight, I suppose. -- Derek
3. Re: Euphoria and Windows
- Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Jun 07, 2003
- 384 views
On reading this thread, I instantly felt that rather than kicking off a hopelessly complicated project, interested parties should contribute to eg http://rays-web.com/eufaq.htm Write something nice, readable, step-by-step and non-threatening. Teach the beginner something, don't do it for them. Pete