Re: Any ideas
Irv Mullins wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Rhett wrote:
>> simulat wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> >I know it's not so much fun as writing code, but maybe others on the list
>> >would like to join me in a bit of a documentation project....
>
>> This would be a winner except for the nature of the project. Since there is a
>> lack of specifity in our current manual, some clever tests will be required
>> to
>> determine just exactly what is done in certain situations and what the limits
>> are in many others. After all that, version x.x of the language may change
>> any one or all of these hard-gained pieces of information, since, according
>> to our fearless leader, all internal matters are subject to change.
>> Documenting chimeras is something that they don't teach where I come
>> from. If there were a commitment from the management of support for the
>> project, I would say that it would have a chance. Rob seems to fear that
>> too much information will give away his secrets, so I doubt that he will
>> truly cooperate.
>
>This is getting to be a very old refrain. Please tell us how much easier it is
>for you to get info on the internals of, for example, Delphi, or how you
>regularly correspond with Bill Gates to find out how Visual C++ works.
>
>These things certainly have internal matters subject to change, so of course
>no one has written any books or documentation for any of Microsoft or Borland's
>products, have they?
>
>Irv
Cheap and wrong. Now, shall we compare notes on how much we dislike
MS. Apples and oranges. What might be the ratio of lines of code written
for Euphoria against any one of these. Also, most of these languages are
strongly typed...a description that doesn't even come to mind when
Euphoria is the subject. Also, despite any marketing flap to the contrary,
these things are written to international standards that have been in place
for some years. When the documentation that is provided is not
sufficiently detailed, one has the standard to go to for comparison and
creating tests...sometimes, even other implementations can be tested.
With Delphi, if you are using the builder, you can generate the same thing
in C/C++ that gives you a cross check against results.
However much overkill and dross there is in the documentation available for
these others, if one wishes to dig for a while, answers are usually available.
There are also a thousand programmers for every Euphoria programmer,
so problems/ambiguities are found and reported much more quickly. Also,
vendors know that large departures with that big a base will buy them loss
of customers. If, for example, Borland or MS at this point in time make
such huge changes to a compiler that it breaks without warning a significant
part of the existing base, they have to consider whether people will move
to a stable, available open source base if that much effort is required. While
RDS appears to have been fairly careful in that respect, Euphoria is such
a long distance from other languages that the barrier is high.
I did not say that it could not or should not be done. I was pointing out that
support from RDS for such a project would make it much easier and most
probably more correct. My feeling is that Rob will evaluate a particular area
of information on how much it possibly reveals of his precious secrets
rather than on how helpful it is to the programmer. He has said enough
things along that line that I think that is a reasonable interpretation. Now I
know that I am an easy target, but I don't hold any of the keys. I think that
you might ask more of someone to whom you have paid money.
Contrary to expressed emotion, I am not your or Euphoria's enemy. I liked
the language the instant I laid eyes on it. There is one gate on it's future and
that one is rusty and built with a one way hinge. It is my belief that Rob
can probably program up just about anything that he wants and fairly
quickly at that. He appears to be inhibited by his internal image of the
language...whatever that may be. He also appears to be inhibited from
explaining himself or his product to any useful degree. He also appears
unable and/or unwilling to build bridges...personal, philosophical, or
programming. The only thing that is likely to change that, if it is possible,
is demand from a large group of the most consistent and capable
contributors to the list...and I do not include myself in that group. So, you
can aim all the illfounded sarcasm that you wish at me. It won't solve
one problem that you have. There is only one source for that...other than
yourself.
Everett L.(Rett) Williams
rett at gvtc.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
