OpenEuphoria

Re: Euphoria Developers Group Discussion

• Posted by Mike777 <anon4321 at ?mail.c?m> May 15, 2008
• 1040 views

Matt Lewis wrote:
> 
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > 
> > Changes to the interpreter do not require community input except when those
> > changes will introduce breaks with old code or will in some way harm the
> > current performance of Euphoria. Otherwise, it's just another feature they
> > can decide to use or not use.
> > 
> > What developers should do is discuss among themselves implementation
> > details,
> > then present a vote to the community... MAYBE. As above, most changes can
> > be done without consulting the general population... and I don't think
> > they'll
> > care! It's just another feature they can decide to use or not use.
> 
> I think part of the reason we look for validation from the community is that
> the development model is so open.  No one is really in charge at this point.
> In theory, Rob's opinion would likely weigh more heavily than others, but
> he's certainly not a dictator (benevolent or otherwise) at this point.
> 
> When a change is proposed that will have large effects upon the way we code
> 
> in euphoria, I'm nervous about imposing my views on others without getting 
> feedback first.  I think one thing that most of us want to preserve (even
> while improving the language) is to preserve what we like about euphoria.
> Of course, this is different for each person.  Adding a function here or
> there is relatively trivial in impact compared to modifying the include
> system, or changing other syntax.

I don't see the bifurcated system as a prescription for avoiding user input on
any specific decision.  The fact that you feel this way is a very, very good
thing and will work to ensure that even if there is 100% consensus amongst the
developers somebody will no doubt suggest that it should at least be mentioned on
the Forum.  Good.

Mike