RE: Future of Euphoria
Hi again,
First, my apologies for the length contained here-in.
Writing is a bad habit of mine. I really need to stop.
>From: Ray Smith <smithr at ix.net.au>
>Subject: RE: Future of Euphoria
>I did a quick look around the archive myself and there is very
>little (almost zero) end user applications...a nice little project ...
>Only applications/Games/whatever that a user can run without
>any Euphoria knowledge should be used.
Yes, this would be most excellent for people like me (see below for
description), and very likely others, too.
>As far as I'm aware the current Windows Installer is very
>good. I'd be interested if you had any problems with that.
The installer worked perfectly in Windows ME.
I apologize, as, by the term "installer", I actually was thinking about the
entire installation process. This would include documentation and anything
necessary to get the user up-and-running with the language as expediently as
possible.
I was unable to get Euphoria working such that I could work with the
language itself. I also mentioned that my familiarity with programming was
only BASIC and a derivitive of LISP - though I don't think I said it was
over 12 years ago. Both these languages were ready out-of-the-box per se,
and I was immediately able to work with the languages themselves.
It's embarrassingly frustrating, but different people do have their
individual strengths and weaknesses.
I have seen that it is true that all people have something unique and
valuable to offer; this, I think, is the very premise of open-source. There
is nothing wrong at all with catering to an individual's unique weaknesses
to be able to share in their unique strengths.
As such, it makes sense to have complete directions and instructions in the
simplest possible terms so even an idiot can get started; that 'idiot' might
be a programming genius. I'm adept at the English language, since I've
placed it in a logical contextual framework, but that doesn't mean a
superior programmer is. Someone might not have a tremendous intelligence,
but a great deal of tenacity, and so may accomplish something important
which no-one else will. Etc..
.
>I can feel the frustration in your words ... and believe me I have
>felt very frustrated myself with Euphoria in the past.
>Euphoria seems like (and is) an amazing language that is missing
>a few features which would skyrocket it's popularity.
>And to make it even worse no one "seems" to care!
>This isn't true of course ... but you can easily be mislead into
>thinking it.
It seems that everyone is frustrated with most everything in the
computer/technology world! It does seem, however, given a binary
fundemental placed into a fairly inert hexidecimal format, that higher-order
languages built on this should be able to do anything one wishes.
Oddly, I agree that Euphoria seems amazing, but I'm unable to express
exactly why I think this. What features are missing?
>As I think Igor and Lucius said before ...
>if you want to use Euphoria that's great ... we will be hear
>to help ... if you don't then goodbye and good luck!
Well, no-one can rightly argue with that, and shouldn't, as no-one's under
any obligation to help anyone.
The problem is that I don't know enough to know if I want to use Euphoria.
This may or may not be true for a lot of people as well. I can only suspect
that is is true.
If you don't want to help in this decision-making process, then that's a
different story all-together; I simply assume that the people who create the
language would want to educate others about it.
For any given unknown, x:
The statement:
"If you want to use x, great, we will help; if you don't, then goodbye!"
is really:
"if (x), then x, else if (not x), then y. end else. end if."
So, to Igor and Lucius et al; I understand your sentiment of non-obligation,
but am unable to process such statement as provided.
Debugging ... null set, (x); null set, (not x); undefined variable, x.
Certainly it's wonderful to have the very makers of the language willing to
help. Obviously you can't help everyone all the time, though, especially if
Euphoria becomes more popular - which is all the more reason to organize
things for new folk to Euphoria and individuals who are newer to
programming. Again, I would think that these people are valuable. Having
the resource of this community to offer assistance is a huge attraction.
>Euphoria is a community language meaning if you want something
>then about the only way you will get it, is if you do it yourself.
This confuses me; on one hand there has been expression to to be inclusive,
but here you are being exclusive. In which ways is Euphoria inclusive and
exclusive, communal and popular?
The only thing I expect is to be able to learn a language and be able to
write anything with it.
>If your interested in writing complex apps "quickly and easily" with
>interfaces to things like web technologies and databases then
>Euphoria probably isn't for you.
TTTT (To Tell The Truth), I don't know enough to know this. Further, I'm
unable to learn outside of contextual understanding, so I am unable to learn
things like HTML, and would be unable to do the things you've mentioned,
since they require learning by rote, which is incomprehensible to me. I
would have to write the database or web-technology in order to interface
with it. Generally; if I can't create or re-create it as a whole concept,
then I cannot understand or use it.
If Euphoria CAN do what other languages can do, and if it IS amazing and a
viable alternative, then I very well may want to undertake the *immense*
task of dedication to learning it. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who
learns a programming language to a fluent degree has undertaken a very large
project and has made a huge commitment of their time and resources.
Allowing people to know if they want to make this commitment to learning
Euphoria is only educational - and facilitative for everyone - and seems to
make complete sense.
As far as databases: I've been wanting to make my own 3-dimensional
inter-relational database engine for about 10 years. This project would be
my main project. This would take the end-result form of an open-matrix
inter-relational database engine which other programs, templates, and GUI's
could overlay upon. The current concept comes from an Alesis QS-8
synthesizer I have which uses an assignable-matrix engine to create
modulation programming. Though simple, it is extremely powerful. In fact,
it's so powerful, you don't need anything else for the purpose.
Is creating an open-matrix inter-relational database engine to drive other
programs possible with Euphoria?
I'm interested in Euphoria because of many things, including its
non-prescribed field-length feature, which is quite luxurious, and anything
else is merely to be tolerated by comparison.
Given the projects I would undertake, I know I'll always end up having to
work from scratch anyway.
In the end, I presume I need to generate binary hexidecimal or something
very basic such that a computer can understand it. (Is this what a compiler
does? Such is my knowledge.) If a higher-order language is flexible and
open-ended to allow me to do whatever I want - all the better, I would
think.
Is Euphoria able to do this?
>If you want to have fun programming ...
>Euphoria is definitely for you!
a) Programming = n%fun + m+m(p-n)%frustration +
q+q(q+n/q(m+m(p-n)))%undefinable.
where:
n = constant(zero)
m = inverse of known accomplishments
p = perceived monetary reward
q = perceived ego reward + (body temperature in Fahrenheit - hours per day
of free time)
Thanks again,
Archetype aka Richard Skenderian
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
