Re: The Great Computer Language Shootout
Ray Smith wrote:
Ray, I'm just your ordinary, average hobbyist programmer, with a few
commercial programs (by which I mean programs that get used by a company
on a daily basis and on which that company depends)... So, in the
interest of my education, can you answer the following for me...?
>"The language should have most of the following desireable features:
>
> 1. Ability to read/write 4K buffers, bypassing standard I/O.
>
Why [should a language have this]? What does EUPHORIA do?
> 2. Process control (i.e. fork()/wait()).
>
This is for threading, right? Is there a good example of when this would
be useful? I'm thinking probably for huge database management
applications...
> 3. Exceptions.
>
Why?
> 4. Regular Expressions (preferably Perl compatible).
>
Why? And don't we have a library for this?
> 5. Linux Kernel Threads.
>
Okay, so maybe process control isn't for threading... :/
> 6. Internet Sockets.
>
Available in a library, right?
> 7. Objects.
>
Why? And isn't this available in Bach?
> 8. Ability to print out its own version number.
>
Okaaaay. And why? (EUPHORIA does this when you run the interpreter, right?)
> 9. A module system, and separate compilation of modules (if
>compiled).
>
Whosee whatee?!
>I may make some exceptions to the above, but only if I feel like it."
>
>The "author" is limiting the languages used to include "what he thinks"
>is the minimum requirements of a language.
>
Yes...
>Euphoria for instance doesn't come close to meeting these requirements.
>
So...?
>Many people have on numerious occasions pointed out these limitations
>and strangely enough alot of the people don't seem to be around here
>anymore.
>
>
One man's "limitations" is another man's "hurdles."
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
