Re: Standard Euphoria Library project
Jason Gade wrote:
> For the most part my quick and unscientific survey finds that a lot of
> "standard library" functionality exists in the archive.
Well, partly ...
I'm sorry that I must say that, but several of the user contributions
are incomplete, buggy, written in a style almost unreadable by others
etc.
E.g. what "standard" operations can be done with sets? There are only a
few of those operations, which we'll find in math textbooks.
Or we can look e.g. at <http://www.brpreiss.com/books/opus4/>, or we can
e.g. look what routines other, *very popular* languages have implemented,
such as Python.
We have a "sets.e" contribution in the archives. Does this contribution
cover these basic functions? No, it doesn't. But a "Standard Library"
that deserves that name certainly should do so! The same is with Fuzzy
Sets, and ... These are only some examples which I know from memory.
> I think that it is just a question of pulling it all together and
> then finding out and adding whatever is still missing.
"Standard" should also mean IMHO, that we'll have some internal
standards concerning the way *how* the library is created. That will
make a big difference to all the "private" contributions.
Regards,
Juergen
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
