Re: Re: What we really need...
Re: Kickstart Euphoria?
A good start would be translating abandonware PC games into Euphoria.
Then redistribute them as freeware after debugging them. Of course,
getting the author/copyright holder's view would be a good idea.
Is there any way to make the programs non-system specific, like with JAVA?
(UGH, I hate JAVA!)
>
> From: "Carl W." <euphoria at cyreksoft.yorks.com>
> Subject: Re: What we really need...
>
>
> Irv wrote:
>
> > Do we need a 'killer app' to make Euphoria more popular?
> > I say no.
>
> Depends what you mean by killer app. Would that be a standalone
> super-product or something that allows you to build one a standalone
> super-product better and faster than using the base language?
>
> > 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.
>
> I sometimes make an exception to this if the app seems buggy then I find it
> was written in VB. ;)
>
> > What DO we need?
>
> A good swift kick? ... Just kidding.
>
> > [...] RDS has done a good job of emphasizing Euphoria's strong points:
> > speed and simplicity, but speed and simplicity apparently aren't enough.
>
> > Euphoria is smaller and faster [...] Yet perl, python, java and ruby
> > each have 10, 100, 1000 times as many users as Euphoria. Why?
>
> To return to the point I was trying to make at the beginning; I can't think
> of many killer apps in any of the languages you mention. The thing that
> makes each of them popular is one thing: code base...
>
> Perl has arguably the largest online repository of user code on the planet.
> And the built-in text-processing capabilities are astounding.
>
> Sun wrote a virtual infinitude of classes for Java - there's so much
> available there that it seems you shouldn't need to write any original code
> in that language if you can just find the right libraries.
>
> Python, like Perl, has so much stuff built into the main language from the
> outset that people gravitate, convinced their job would be easier.
>
> Ruby I don't know too much about, but from what I've seen, they started out
> from a small band of fanatics who raved about it everywhere they went
> online. Sort of a Ruby missionary project.
>
> What do I suggest we do?
>
> We could adopt all strategies - write top notch libraries, then go forth and
> spread the word of the mighty Object Sequence advertising our libraries
> along the way. Convert people from the Heathen Otherlanguages! This ain't
> just Snake Oil!
>
> Ahem.
>
> Or we could be a bit more subtle.
>
> Either way, if we want Euphoria to be big (and we should be careful what we
> wish for here) we can't sit around like we are doing. We need to motivate.
>
> Carl - All hail the Object Sequence. :)
>
>
>
>
" '...But this is one thought that has impressed me, Govinda. Wisdom is
not communicable. The wisdom which a wise man tries to communicate always sounds
foolish.'
'Are you jesting?' asked Govinda.
'No, I am telling you what I have discovered. Knowledge can be
communicated, but not wisdom. One can find it, live it, be fortified by it, do
wonders through it, but one cannot communicate and teach it..." - fr. Siddhartha,
by Hermann
Hesse (1877-1962)
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
