Re: Possible Virus
Touche' or is that touchy,
I wouldn't bother to suggest/criticize/bother if I did not believe all the
things that you have noted about Euphoria. It is the best looking language
that I have seen in thirty-three years of looking at different languages.
And if those darn virus-protection types( whom I suspect of at least
distributing if not actually writing some viruses) would like to give me a
refund, I'll take it 
Now when you get around to it, since I have indirectly taken some potshots
at the type of coding that you do(and I freely admit that you are a much
better coder than I have ever been), why don't you take a shot at some of
the other points that I so humbly tried to make. What I was trying to say
was that the type of coding that you do belongs exactly where it normally
is, hidden behind the routines of a library. I just wish the libraries were
more generally and less particularly aimed. Meaning, that they could be used
in any environment with suitable adjustments...DOS, Windows, Linux,& etc.
Everett L.(Rett) Williams
rett at gvtc.com
On Wed, 3 Nov 1999 19:21:21 -0600, Boehme, Gabriel
<gboehme at POSTOFFICE.MUSICLAND.COM> wrote:
>Everett Williams wrote:
>
>>[...] Euphoria, as most interpreter type languages, is by it's nature
>>viruslike in behavior [...]
>
>You have to admit, though, that Euphoria has better run-time error
checking,
>more powerful type checking, and is easier to write in than most other
>viruses.
>
>Additionally, the only programs on my disk which have been infected with it
>are -- you guessed it -- the Euphoria programs; and they were deliberately
>written that way to begin with!
>
>So this is "viruslike behavior?" Those darn virus-protection software
makers
>have been ripping us off for years!
>
>
>Gabriel
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
