RE: goto... (2 more cents)
I think that we should start a Euphoria war! We'll have the GOTO
faction vs. the 'not for a million dollars' camp.
Then we'll come up with some goto-version vs. no-goto-version coding
competitions and see which is faster and/or easier to follow.
The Euphorialimpics! Sound like fun?
-- Brian
PS - I know the latter will probably lose the obfuscated coding
competition but I'm willing to live with that.
Euman wrote:
> From: "Kat" <gertie at PELL.NET>
> > On 9 Feb 2002, at 0:48, Robert Craig wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Euler German writes:
> > > > Though I'd love to here a word or two from Rob.
> > > > Hello Rob! Your time now!
> > >
> > > I've stated many times in the past that I am
> > > firmly opposed to adding a goto statement.
> > > You'd have to pay me a million dollars.
> > > (real U.S. dollars, not 62 cent Canadian dollars)
> >
> > Since someone with the source code has added goto to the source code, i
> > pay should him for Eu from now on?
> >
> > Kat
>
> I think it a share the wealth sortof thing going on in Robs head.
> You have to pay him for Euphoria and pay anyone who develops
> extra's into the language.
>
> Im not the Wizard behind the curtain (Rob is) but I think Rob might be
> becoming bored (or tired) of having the hassle of all us.
> (Just a guess, if your not then sorry Wizard.)
>
> So he (Rob) has devised a method (license) that say's ok you can extend
> Euphoria but you cant do certain thing I say, the rest is OK
> and you can even sell it to make big bucks.
>
> Then all the questions will lie in the hands of people that
> created the extra's and when they're gone from the face of the earth
> you'll be stuck with something without support and you'll be back
> to asking Rob about "Goto's" or whatever again.
>
> But, still paying the Wizard...
>
> I might be wrong but this is certainly how I see it...
>
> Maybe it's time to crack open some C books, huh?
>
> Meeooww on that a while.... 
>
> Euman
> euman at bellsouth.net
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
