Re: Euphoria and Mac OS X
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> darek wrote:
> > Just quick question. Is there any possibility that Euphoria will be ported
> > to the Intel-based machines running Mc OS X?
>
> I'm not working on it, and I don't know of anyone who is,
> but it should be fairly easy for someone with a bit of
> C knowledge, and $79.
>
> <a
> href="http://www.rapideuphoria.com/reg.htm">http://www.rapideuphoria.com/reg.htm</a>
>
> It shouldn't require many changes from the Linux/FreeBSD
> versions of Euphoria.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
Now I (usually) keep my criticisms to Euphoria to as minimal a level as possible
but this is the one "ROB! YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED TO CHANGE/ADD THIS FEATURE OR
EUPHORIA WILL *DIE*!!!1" comment that I hold to be absolutely vaild.
I LOVE Euphoria.
I LOVE the Mac.
Which do I choose?
I have a Mac, I work for a company that uses a lot of Macs, and once out of
school I'm working for a company that develops Mac apps. Windows is pretty much
dead to me (I dual boot for a few games and Euphoria).
The sole reason I will not upgrade to 3.0 is that there's no Mac support and I'm
changing jobs. I'm completely stuck (willingly and happily) with a Mac for both
work and pleasure. Currently, I can use Euphoria for scripting at work (we use
Linux servers) but this time next year the only computer I have will be a Mac.
Now, yes, I can dual-boot Windows and Mac OS X on my computer (and do) but if I'm
forced to restart my computer just to use Euphoria than good-bye Euphoria.
The breakdown of OS usage goes Windows > Mac > *nix. You support two very nice
*nixes (Linux and FreeBSD) but adding all desktop and server users of those OSes
still amounts to less than Mac OS X (3.4% versus 2.9%). Why do you support Linux
and BSD but not the more popular OS? Isn't it in your best interest commercially
to port Euphoria to it? If I was arguing that you should port Euphoria to VMS
then, understandably and rightly so, you could brush me off but I'm arguing that
the second most popular OS in the world get a single port of a nice programming
language.
You could also say (like above) that I could buy the source and port it myself
but I must ask why should I? I don't see how me paying you money so I can work
for hours porting it to helps me in any way. It's possible to survive without
Euphoria and it's a commercial language (one doesn't pay Wal-Mart to move into
their hometown if they think it'd be good for Wal-Mart's buisness do they?). I
also severely lack the time to embark on such a project since I go to college and
work. If anything went wrong I'd have to analyze the source code figure it all
out and try to fix it between classes and working. You are busy with work too,
this is true, however, Euphoria IS your work. Plus, if I had the time to port a
language I would port an open source one instead since it'd involve the same
amount of work but without me paying $80.
In summation, I sincerely hope you'll take this into account and work towards
producing a version of Euphoria for the Mac because otherwise I (and others) will
be Euphoria-less and neither I nor you I suspect want that.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
