Re: bloated 2.5
Chris Bensler wrote:
>Now you've gone and completely turned the table Robert. Give us
>our console-based installer back.
I think that for the effort involved, that it would not be worth
the time for him to maintain two installers. If you are a
seasoned user, the windows installer should not cause any
problems.
>Second, since when does the euphoria translator have anything to
>do with the interpeter. When I download the interpreter, that's
>what I want. Not a whole bunch of files that I can't use. I have
>absolutely no interest in the translator, and I wasted time
>trying to figure out what all those stubs were, and then I
>deleted them anyways. Over 2MB!? Sheesh, and I thought you were
>concerned about bloating the distributable. There isn't even any
>information about those files other than a brief file
>description in bin.doc
Again, I don't see what the problem is. For a seasoned user such
as yourself, simply delete the files. Of course, they don't
really hurt anything. And 2 megs isn't much these days. Euphoria
is still much smaller than most programming languages.
>Same thing for the Eu-in-Eu source code. It's novel for the time
>being, but in 6 months, people aren't going to care about the
>Eu-in-Eu source code. It doesn't appear that it's useful for
>anything more than making some utilities like a custom debugger
>or script engine. It's definitely not a replacement for the
>compiled interpreter, and there doesn't appear to be any way for
>PD users to build a front end that can be used with the binary
>backend. It should be a separate download. Correct me if I'm
>wrong, maybe it just needs to be documented better. If all I
>wanted was an eu script engine, David Cuny made one over 5 years
>ago. Several other people have made them too. This Eu-in-Eu
>being included with the PD distributable seems like a gimmick to
>me. Hopefully I'm wrong, and there is indeed a way for PD users
>to make IL code that can be run by backend.exe
Oh come on. It is only 205k. Good grief. If you don't like it,
ignore it.
And, all due respect to the authors of the other
Euphoria-in-Euphoria interpreter, the one included with 2.5
appears to better and faster, and supports the entire Euphoria
language, when compared to the Delroy Gayle (original author)
interpreter.
>Third, PUT SOME EFFORT INTO YOUR INSTALLER!! Don't you know that
>everybody judges a book by it's cover, despite the cliche? The
>setup is extremely undesirable. Especially for seasoned users. I
>have to resort to installing new copies of Euphoria on an
>alternate machine, and manually copy it over to my workstation,
>because I don't want it mucking up my custom eu environment.
It took me all of 1 minute to reset the environment variables to
what I wanted. Big deal.
I can appreciate you not liking Euphoria, or Robert Craig, but no
one is making you use Euphoria. I don't think your overall tone
helps this mailing list. Based on your posts of the past, if I
was Robert Craig, I'd ignore most of what you write. You might
even have some legitimate gripes, but you come across as if
you're angry. Hey, it is only a programming language - get a
life!
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
