RE: Eu 'Textbook' Prospects (Was: RE: GOTO - A fresh perspective?)
Irv Mullins wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:27 pm, C. K. Lester wrote:
>
> I didn't say it was better. I said it was more complete.
okay, gotcha.
But, in according to my finite viewpoint, anything that is "more
complete" is "better."
Of course, then we get into the argument that C++ is more complete than
C, but who would say C++ is better. PLUS, it depends on the context (as
you've demonstrated below).
> 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?
No. My questions is, "Why can't you?" Is it because the language can't
handle it? Or is it because nobody (including Rob) has done an include
file for it? This goes for your graphics/GUI contexts as well...
Rob?
> If you want to see a list of organizations using Python for
> significant projects, look here:
> http://www.python.org/psa/Users.html
Yes, that will help! Thanks.
> 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.
Most users are on your side, I would bet. The problem(s) is/are:
1. EUPHORIA is not open source, like Python, so it doesn't
have the luxury of a world of developers.
2. EUPHORIA is not free.
3. EUPHORIA is not as cross-platform compatible.
The solution(s) is/are:
1. Convince Rob to go open source.
2. Convince Rob to make it free.
3. Convince Rob to develop for other platforms.
Item 3 would be much easier with item 1 completed... :)
Also, EUPHORIA can be the "complete programming" language you desire.
How much can you (or anybody else) contribute to that?
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
