Re: I don't like the intro page of the documentation.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Kat has a sense of what is needed for the first page of the documentation.

I expected some comments (grunts from trolls) about my blatant use of the letter "a" to start each paragraph--that's my attempt a PR style writing.

I can find nearly identical descriptions of all languages. They are all fast, easy to learn, powerful, easy to read, ..., and more of the same. There is never a "page two" that justifies any claims.


"Tweeking" the introduction is especially valuable right now. This project needs ideas.

"built-in data-types"

  • that clarifies the following reference to "user-types"

"array of objects"

  • "array" is an implementation of a mathematical matrix (as in Fortran)
  • "objects" can unfortunately be confused with OOP

"An object can dynamically hold either an atom or a sequence."

  • makes sense to an existing Euphoria user, but how do I explain this to someone new to Euphoria?

datum and data are pedantic, but also descriptive

single datum vs compound data

  • I am searching for a nice distinction between atom and sequence
  • any ideas?

two, three, or four data-types?

Ancients (the really old ones) had a math system based on one, two, and many.

Therefore two (the largest number available) is reason describe Euphoria as having two data-types: atom and sequence. An object is not a distinctive data-type, only an "either or" of the two fundamental types. This makes the description of Euphoria smaller and simpler.

An "integer" is just an appendix; if integers did not exist then Euphoria programs would still run. Integers for efficiency make sense to experts but are just noise to a novice. This suggests:

"Use the integer data-type (a special case of the atom) when speed and low memory use are important."


A "list" data-type appears in many languages. A shopping list is natural so that any programming language better be able to make one. Lisp is lists (wonderfully elegant) but not everyone is willing to put up its eccentricity. Lists have been added to many languages but that just increases the number of compound data-types available for that language. Euphoria uses the sequence (aka list) as a fundamental design choice; as best as I can tell sequences make Euphoria unique.

A "primitive" data-type appears in many languages. Typically that means integer, float, boolean, and character, but sometimes ending up with a dozen variations. Euphoria uses the atom and just the atom; as best as I can tell that also makes Euphoria unique.

So an atom-sequence design is unique and special to Euphoria. (Adding object, integer, and user-types results in a practical language.)

Therefore I conclude that: "Euphoria has a unique data-type design."

The atom-sequence is the basis of clean unified design. Operators always work the same ( + always adds, not sometimes concatenates). Sequences always behave the same (same indexing, slicing, ..., for all sequences). In a conventional language things are not so tidy. So again I conclude that: "Euphoria has a unique data-type design."

Remaining features could be described as "industry standard." Loops, conditionals, assignment, and the rest are logical adaptations of features found in all languages.

So, can I stick with "unique" and "one-of-a-kind?"


This introduction to Euphoria is contingent on my writing four essays where I justify my claims. I'm waiting for anti-Euphoria trolls to appear so I can get more ideas on what to write.


After I do several re-writes, I will appreciate Kat's final word on fixing my grammar.


new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu