Re: Eu Rebellion (was: New Euphoria Users Website)
Matthew Lewis wrote:
> However, if we produced working interpreters that we
> all found useful, we might be able to demonstrate the utility and
> effectiveness of the changes, plus giving Rob a leg up on the official
> implementation.
Having written several preprocessors and even a Euphoria interpreter, I
disagree. Robert's reaction to most of my stuff was along the lines of
"That's nice, but it won't happen in Euphoria." Which is, of course, entirely
his perogative.
I don't think that people will start using alternative interpreters, either.
Not just because they are crippled, but because there is no guarantee for
future compatibility. The fear that a product might become unsupported is
pretty powerful.
Despite all the GUI toolkits, Euphoria is still a DOS application. Anything
extention beyond that has been developed by the users, and isn't officially
supported by RDS.
The tools for interfacing Euphoria to the Windows or GTK libraries are about
at the level of assembly code (except assembly supports structures). The
Euphoria editor is a DOS application, and the trace under Windows is
basically a console window (which is why it runs so slowly).
I'm not saying this is a bad thing. That's just the way it is, and I don't see
any reason to think it will change in the near future.
-- David Cuny
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
