OpenEuphoria

RE: Blow

• Posted by Chris Bensler <bensler at mailops.com> Mar 02, 2001
• 493 views

The main reason I DL'd Eu, is it's simplicity. Adding 'EXTRAS' would've 
deterred me from getting it I think. They should be optional. Not core 
parts of the language package.
The last thing I would want to see is Euphoria turn into one of those 
DEV languages that includes everything plus the kitchen sink and 
bathtub. They should be reccommended from the DOCS though..

I like the idea that the EU installation can fit on a single floppy 
disk. This makes it portable. I can take it with me wherever I go, and 
install it in a matter of a minute or two. I'm up  a coding in a matter 
of fifteen minutes. Even having to set up the windows associations, set 
up win32lib and EEcs too. This I like. It is simple and a lot less 
complications. Adding things to the core would only add even more 
confusion for those who are already having trouble getting it up and 
running as it is now..
Maybe Rob should consider having an ACCESSORIES installation for EU. 
People could still get the basic package, and also get the Do-Dads and 
What-Nots if they WANT to.


Chris


Travis Beaty wrote:
> In a message dated 3/1/2001 11:20:32 PM Central Standard Time, 
> mabrown at SENET.COM.AU writes:
> 
> > I really think MEdit would be a good choice to bundle with Eu. It is 
> > small.
> >  It isn't programmed using Eu though to the best of my knowledge, so that
> >  might be a minus.
> >  
> >  Perhaps Judith's IDE when it is complete?
> 
> Yes, Judith's IDE, when completed, would be an excellent choice.  
> Unfortunately, that's liable to put off all the DOS diehards.  I'd 
> suggest 
> including in the distribution both Judith's IDE and CS:EE.  That would 
> give 
> both camps a reason to cheer.
> 
> 
> 
> Happy Hunting,
> 
> Travis Beaty
> Claude, Texas.
> 
>