OpenEuphoria

Re: Fair Criticism

• Posted by Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> Aug 12, 2001
• 500 views

----- Original Message -----
From: C. K. Lester <cklester at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Fair Criticism


>
> > There is, but Euphoria isn't a good language for obfuscating code.
> > Besides, Perl programs win every time, without even trying to obfuscate.
> > Better would be for someone (several of us, actually) to submit Euphoria
> > versions of the Great Computer Shootout tests:
> >
> > http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/
>
> I think RDS should post code to this site and let us know about it.

Actually, upon reading the FAQ at that site, I think Euphoria isn't in the
running. First of all, Doug shows a strong preference for languages which
are  free (ok, pdEu is free) and which come with source code, (someday,
partly),
and have a "measurable user base".

But wait, there's more:

--quote
The language should have most of the following desireable features:

Ability to read/write 4K buffers, bypassing standard
     -- yes
Process control (i.e.
                -- no
Exceptions.                                                                 
                         -- no
Regular Expressions (preferably Perl
             -- no
Linux Kernel
         - - no
Internet
         -- no
Objects.                                                                    
                            -- no
Ability to print out its own version
        -- kinda
A module system, and separate compilation of modules (if compiled)      --
yes.

I may make some exceptions to the above, but only if I feel like it.
-- end quote

However, there's nothing stopping us from downloading his test suite,
writing
Euphoria versions, and running the tests ourselves. He encourages that.
If we were to be able to prove Euphoria to be outstandingly better than
most everything else, he might make that exception, and add Euphoria to the
list.

Regards,
Irv