Re: enough chatter
Bernie Ryan wrote:
>The list has hundreds and hundreds of lines of rattle about why the
language should be changed and how I do something in another language.
>
>
> The real challenge is try to use the language the way it
>was designed and try to develop aids to help other programmers so they
>can gain from your quality code and experienced skills.
For some hints and examples of potentially useful Euphoria extensions check
out www.jsoftware.com. APL starting using sequences around 1980 and J since
its beginning around 6 years ago. Internally J and APL probably bear no
resemblance to Euphoria. These languages are fast on large arguments but
slow if the usual flow control statements need to be used on decent size
arguments or iteratively. Graphing the mandelbrot set is really, really
slow. Euphoria seems like an enticing language to program in mainly for its
simplicity and speed. I wonder how many languages like APL, J, Smalltalk,
Java might benefit from being compiled into Euphoria instead of bytecode or
into C, like APL has been trying to do for 20 years or Smalltalk with much
difficulty? Its seems to me that very good utility libraries, avoidance of
anything that resembles OOP and somehow sidestepping the usual codebloating
that happens to all languages destined to be used significantly would be a
good thing for Euphoria. For a prime example of codebloating check out any
Smalltalk package - thousands and thousands of helpful little bits of code
and everything an object.
Jay Daulton
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
