OpenEuphoria

Re: question on func equal_from

• Posted by Kenneth Rhodes <ken_rhodes30436 at ya?oo.com> Jul 26, 2007
• 704 views

jacques deschênes wrote:
> 
> I'm not found of pushing everything in the core interpreter, it will become
  I think you meant "fond", Jacques!  

overwheighted and more difficult to maintain.
> A this time I would rather see:
> 1) adding object support
> 2) adding error handling support
> 
> As those 2 are parts of most used modern language.
> Some are afraid of oop but it's really easy to catch.
> 
> jacques Deschênes
> 

I'm no programmer, yet as an observer of how Euphoria over
the past decade or so, it appears  to me that the lack of native
OOP support has been a factor in its lack of popularity.

I gather that routine_id(st) has enabled clever Euphoria
programmers to implement OOP in Euphoria, but somewhat 
awkwardly and at the cost of speed. Mike Nelson, a brilliant
Euphoria programmer, has contributed perhaps 4 or 5 generations
of OOP Euphoria libraries - and he is currently working on yet another
one, "Methodica", which he considers to be a new language based on 
Euphoria.  More on Methodica here:
http://www.openeuphoria.org/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=6&fromYear=1&toMonth=7&toYear=C&postedBy=&keywords=methodica

Methodica sounds to me like a high level fork of Euphoria. Mike stated
in one of his posts that he would not attempt backwards compatibility
with Euphoria.

Would an effort to implement OOP in Euphoria be able to exploit
the talent of Mike Nelson, or someone like hime, toward the development 
of Euphoria proper?

Would an efficient implementation of OOP in Euphoria require a
complete rewrite of the "C" front-end? 

Didn't someone, perhaps Derek Parnell, suggest or even start a
project to implement Euphoria with OOP in "D"?  Are their lessons
to be learned from his efforts?

  



Ken Rhodes
Folding at Home: http://folding.stanford.edu/
100% MicroSoft Free
SuSE Linux 10.0
No AdWare, SpyWare, or Viruses!
Life is Good,