OpenEuphoria

Re: A question about certain language features

• Posted by Igor Kachan <kinz at peterlink.ru> Feb 12, 2002
• 600 views

Irv Mullins wrote:

----------
> ïÔ: Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com>
> ëÏÍÕ: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> ôÅÍÁ: Re: A question about certain language features
> äÁÔÁ: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 21:50
>
> On Tuesday 12 February 2002 11:51 am, Igor Kachan wrote:
> >
> > Inside a subroutine, in EUPHORIA, only PRIVATE variables
> > may be declared. These points are in the reference manual.
> >
>
> True, but what is wrong with having private constants?
> It's a convenience, and produces clearer code. No one has
> provided a reason why it is either a good or a bad idea.
> No doubt it was just an accident that it turned out that way.

This question is answered by Robert just now, about
"good and bad".

But we can make the concrete analisys of the frequencies
of useing some programming language fetures to decide
is some thing very useful or it is just a very rare thing.
If thing is rare, then there is no any reason to
replicate it in the new language.

Why not such analisys?

If we have the open sources of some program texts in C,
C++, Modula, Ada, Forth ...

But Windows has no open C sources. This secret is not
a good thing.

Task of analisys is not simple and cheap but without
concrete statistical stuff we may argue & argue & argue
without really useful results ...

Then Rob just will come to his own desision and program
new official version ...

The very good possibility to say any thing you think
without any side-effect ...

> Some people want Euphoria to be a minimalist language.
> To achieve that goal, there are a lot of things that need
> to be taken out.

Now, any one, who *really* wants something, can use the
source, learn C language and make system programming
to get interpreter on his taste.

Why not ?

But EU is the end user's language, language which
doesn't require knowledge of C to get working
compiled C program. EU is a good example of the
robust useing of existing C languages.

> Other people want Euphoria to be the most usable language
> possible. For that to happen, there are a few things
> which need to be added.

OK, why not ? But who must care this new Euphoria
to be solide and will not broken under own
weight? (somewhat bad frase, my Runglish, I'm sorry).

> Frankly, I don't recommend holding your breath
> while waiting for either of these things to happen.

Thanks. But I can not understand well
enough some hints, I'm sorry.

Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru