Re: 8-bit characters in identifiers, and an old message reply
I agree with the fact that a programming language should be very
flexable
and allow the programmers who use it (not necessarily the ones who
write it) to decide
what features it needs. That was the idea behind my rparse program,
however a
word of caution: rparse is very experimental and not recommened for
complex
programming at this time as its not been completely debugged yet. (On
the
other hand a complex program would be perfect for debugging rparse :)
jbrown
On 0, Christian.CUVIER at agriculture.gouv.fr wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot, Igor.
> While I'm at it, I still remember things you said about coding
> discipline. I may not agree with the priority list, while we probably
> mean about the same.
> Programming means: let a finite-state machine implement what you have
> in mind, which is a picture, a control flow, or any sort of fancy, fuzzy
> object. So you don't have a "GetItDone()" button, and you have to
> restrain the way you think to what the finite-state automaton can
> handle. In this respect, coding is a discipline just as harsh as
> military discipline can be.
> But there is a huge difference here. Depending on your position in the
> army, you are submitted to or enforce this discipline. Butcomputer
> coding interfaces are multiple, so you can have various styles of
> coding, some languages may be better suited for some purposes than
> others, etc..
> So, there is freedom of choice, which is a big difference. If,
> furthermore, the programming community has some say on what the language
> permits, this freedom of choice is enhanced further. That's why I think
> it is feasible and favourable to suggest or request that a language
> acommodate for more coding styles or ways of expression, even at the
> cost of some redundancy.
> Somebody on this list said that a language should be kept as simple as
> possible in order to concentrate on the program, not the coding. Well,
> the less distorsion you have between what you have in mind and the
> actual coding, the less distracted from th final goal you are, and this
> probably reduces the number of bugs and logical flaws in the source at
> early stages.
> I am not a professional coder, so I feel quite free about using any
> language I feel fit. If I decide to code something big, I'll have to
> decide between C++ (or Delphi) and an enhanced form of Euphoria. I
> didn't test the newer rparse, but it looks like an excellent and likely
> alternative.
>
> Have a nice day!
>
> CChris
>
--
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
