RE: Major Bug in Interpreter [Attn: Robert Craig]
Robert Craig wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>
> Chris Bensler wrote:
> > Did you ask any of your patrons if they thought that was an acceptable
> > sacrifice for the sake of a shorthand feature like $????
>
> Patron, did you ever pay me for the translator I gave you 5 years ago,
> that you said you would pay for "eventually"?
You gave me more than that. And to be honest, that is the only reason I
didn't start bitching sooner.
The arrangement was not that I would pay you. I said that I would like
to pay anyways, because I wanted to support you. Things change.
You gave me the translator in gratitude for my efforts in finding and
setting up topica.
Perhaps if you didn't sluff me off like a piece of dandruff, I would
have been more inclined to keep to my intentions, and maybe I would
still be assisting, instead of pointing out your poor business
practices.
> > I think you have completely defeated the value of having $ at all.
> > For crying out loud, a shorthand is supposed to SAVE time and effort,
> > not create MORE work.
>
> I'm pretty sure 90%+ of people would like to keep the $
> feature, rather than keep the freedom to permanently modify a variable
> via function side-effects at the same time they are also modifying it
> via doubly-subscripted assignment.
How do you know 90%? Because nobody else is complaining? Perhaps that is
because they know that it's FUTILE.
Did you ever do any surveys to find out what the general concensus is?
And there was no other way to accomplish that?
I implemented that shorthand in my preprocessor in 2002 (or was it
2001), and it did not break compatability.
> > Once again, we have to resort to hacks to overcome Eu's stupidity.
>
> Where "hack" = split one ambiguous statement into two clear statements.
The hack is that we have to use unintuitive practices to overcome a
trivial thing that should never be in the first place.
> If Euphoria is "stupid", what about the person who has been using it,
> and whining about it, for several years without finding a better
> language?
I have found better languages. None that have the potential to be as
good as Euphoria, but you are quickly and systematically eliminating
that difference.
> > If this is such a 'minor' issue, then why has it been reported by at
> > least 2 people that I know of already? 2.5 isn't even final yet.
>
> And both of those people understand why the change was made,
> and neither is suggesting that $ was a bad idea.
They understand, but do they AGREE?
I understand too, but that doesn't mean I think it's a good solution.
> > It may be a minor issue to you, but it is not to many of us.
>
> Please don't say "us" when you have personally
> never been affected by this issue. You should speak for yourself,
> not for some imaginary group of unnamed people.
Unlike you, I interact with other users of Euphoria, and discuss issues
like this. I say 'us' because that's what I mean.
Chris Bensler
Code is Alchemy
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
