Re: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:27 pm, C. K. Lester wrote:
> I'm not convinced that it's "better" than EUPHORIA. Maybe as an idea,
> you can explain (or point me to opinions) how programming Python apps
> for MS Windows would be easier/better/more efficient.
I didn't say it was better. I said it was more complete.
If I should need an app which can connect to a website, search for
some keyword(s) and download a page, I know that it can be done in
Python, with just a handful of lines of code, and it will work.
Can I say the same thing about Euphoria?
So, if my needs include anything to do with the internet, then, yes,
Python is better. Because it is more complete.
If I need to do some graphics, or a GUI, then objects (not the Euphoria kind)
make the task much easier.
Pascal has 'em, C++ has 'em, Python has 'em,
Euphoria doesn't. So which would be "better"?
Again, it's a matter of completeness.
If you want to see a list of organizations using Python for significant
projects, look here: http://www.python.org/psa/Users.html
But enough of this. I'm not promoting Python, I'm trying, unsuccessfully
it seems, to get Euphoria to grow into a complete programming language -
or at least one which can't be immediately discarded as inappropriate for
whatever task is at hand. I'm not the only one who has tried this, the
others just gave up and moved on long ago.
Regards,
Irv
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
