OpenEuphoria

Re: crash_message

• Posted by "Cuny, David" <David.Cuny at DSS.CA.GOV> Sep 03, 1999
• 452 views

Roderick Jackson wrote:

> But Euphoria *isn't* one of those languages. That's
> the whole point, one of the things that makes it unique.
> It embraces the 'it can be abused' viewpoint quite
> thoroughly.

I think this 'it can be abused' thread misses the point. The more important
question is: 'Does it provide a useful functionality that can't be achieved
with the current features in the language?' The answer is 'Yes.'

> Consider...

I consider the lack of forward references and routine_id scoping to be
design flaws. I hope that Robert will reconsider these.

> No offense Ralf, but you seem to dislike all (or most)
> of the above positive benefits of Euphoria. Why do you
> even use it?

I picked Euphoria for the following reasons:

   - QBasic was limited in memory
   - It's interpreted
   - It was easy to learn
   - It's similar enough to C to pick up easily

None of the reasons you listed were on my list, yet I continue to code in
Euphoria.

-- David Cuny