Re: Re: What we really need...
I'd love to see lemmings...
I think that they're still holding on to the copyright for that one though.
The beauty of that game is that it's quite simple to program, it's the
DESIGN of those levels that made them so addictive. Only JUST enough
resources to save enough lemmings, especially in the later levels.
=====================================================
.______<-------------------\__
/ _____<--------------------__|===
||_ <-------------------/
\__| Mr Trick
>From: david <mpenzi at bellsouth.net>
>Reply-To: EUforum at topica.com
>To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
>Subject: Re: Re: What we really need...
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 20:34:19 -0500
>
>
>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>
> > Date: 2002/11/12 Tue AM 04:49:37 EST
> > To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.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
<snip>
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
