Re: What we really need...
- Posted by mistertrik at hotmail.com Nov 12, 2002
- 474 views
You know... 23000 downloads doesn't necissarily mean that much. I don't know about you guys, but I found the default editor extremely hard to use, and it took me quite a while to figure out the language without tutorials (there weren't any back then, so that's improved at least.) I think there will be a lot of people who downloaded, and deleted after giving up on it. I'd like to see a much slicker interface to the user, at least when they're beginning. For example: An installer for euphoria that had: File associations in the registry automated setup. An included editor that was windows based, with: context-sensitive help for anything in library.doc and win32lib.htm auto-complete clipboard support (copy-paste) keyword colouring links to examples.. or a windows-based tutorial, that demonstrate use of EACH procedure or control or function A walkthrough of the languages features, and a more indepth tutorial I know this exists in some of the docs already, but it could be improved in it's 'bells and whistles' - for lack of a better term. it's awfully plain right now. example code explanations, and perhaps 'canned' traces of these programs in a windows format. win32lib included, and tutorial programs for it part of the walkthrough. I would be quite happy to put my time towards developing a tutorial program, and working on the installer. Do you people think this sort of project would be worthwhile? ===================================================== .______<-------------------\__ / _____<--------------------__|=== ||_ <-------------------/ \__| Mr Trick >From: Igor Kachan <kinz at peterlink.ru> >Reply-To: EUforum at topica.com >To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com> >Subject: Re: What we really need... >Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:15:41 +0300 > > >Hello Irv, > >To see some iteration to the real situation we can visit : > >http://download.com.com/3150-2069-0-1-4.html > >and check the Total number of downloads for the different languages >from this site. > >Euphoria is *popular* language, and only it is marked as *simple* >and *powerful*. > >Rob doesn't care about such the counts, so we do not know >how many downloads was from the own RDS sites for >the Windows/Dos/Linux/FreeBSD versions. > >Then, I think some EU people just do their job, write the >programs and just keep the silence about their tools to avoid >extra talking. > >There are about 350 known authors in RDS archive and about 350 >subscribers on this list, but from March about 23000 programmers >got the Win/Dos *EU version 2.3* just from download.com. > >Compare 23000 and 350 please, do you see some the latent >*power* of Euphoria programmers? > >We just know nothing about those >much more than 22650 members of EU2.3 community >in 61 registered countries ! > >Euphoria is Powerful and Popular right Now ! > >Don't worry be happy ! > >All we need we'll write in Euphoria! > >We do not need any killers, you are right ! > >Regards, >Igor Kachan >kinz at peterlink.ru > >---------- > > Îò: irv at take.maxleft.com > > Êîìó: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com> > > Òåìà: What we really need... > > Äàòà: 12 íîÿáðÿ 2002 ã. 12:03 > > > > Do we need a 'killer app' to make Euphoria more popular? > > I say no. > > > > No, because most people do not know or care what language their > > applications are written in. Would you stop using your favorite and most > > productive app just because you discovered that it had been written in > > VisualWhooPas-2.0? > > > > Didn't think so. > > > > No, because any competent programmer knows that any app can be > > written in any language. What matters is _how easily_ it can be written > > in a given language. > > > > What DO we need? > > > > To make Euphoria more popular among programmers ~ who else is going > > to use it? ~ we need to honestly evaluate where Euphoria excels, and >where > > it fails. RDS has done a good job of emphasizing Euphoria's strong >points: > > speed and simplicity, but speed and simplicity apparently aren't enough. > > > > Consider Perl, Python, Java, Ruby, Rebol..... > > Euphoria is smaller and faster than any of the above. > > Euphoria is more readable than perl or java, and (arguably) python and >ruby > > as well. > > > > Yet perl, python, java and ruby each have 10, 100, 1000 times as many >users > > as Euphoria. Why? If you really expect Euphoria to be more popular, >you'll > > have to be able to answer that question. > > > > Let's see what you think. > > Regards, > > Irv > >==^^=============================================================== >This email was sent to: mistertrik at hotmail.com > >