Re: Ken's abrasiveness
Kat wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
> >
> >
> > Kat, I respect you, and I rarely raise to answer rants like this, but here
> > goes...
> >
> > Kat wrote:
> > >
> > > Yea, you can't just stroll in here, spend 10 years coding in Euphoria, and
> > > ask for things to change! Don't expect you'll get nested routines like you
> > > asked for the first month you were here, or goto, or case/switch, or 64bit
> > > integers, or 8bit string types, or multiple inheritance in classes, or
> > > eval() / string execution, or "reverse" name resolution, or the latest
> > > OS's 64bit function calls, or a real debugger that can edit the variable's
> > > values, or anything else. If they ever do arrive, they'll be because
> > > someone else thought of them.
> >
> > It hasn't been that long since euphoria's been open source. There still
> > aren't many people who understand how to change things, especially in the
> > back end. Some of these things aren't trivial, maybe aren't even possible
> > without a full rewrite. I think everyone could cite an example of where
> > their favorite feature has been rejected by the community.
>
> I feel like *all* of my suggestions were rejected over the years. Even from
> the start, with string types, nesting procedures, and a debugger that can
> change
> the var's values. And of course, goto. And string execution. and sheesh, the
> brick wall i ran into with strings at all, right down to "why would you want
> to parse a string?, you don't want Euphoria for that!, go back to mirc and
> pascal!".
> Just comparing Eu to the most used capabilities of Mirc and Turbo Pascal would
> show features Eu could use to be more versatile!
>
> <snip>
>
> > Hey, we're programmers, which means we're a bunch of pedantic detail freaks
> > with strong opinions about everything. It turns out that most of the folks
> > around here disagree with you on that particular issue.
>
> Which particular issue?, because i see obstacles (humans) in front of *every*
> issue. Even me making eunet http functions threadsafe! I know someone will do
> it, and maybe they will even lift the code i did eubot with, just like i was
> going to do, but it's not acceptable for ME to do it, so i quit working on it.
> So i won't be releasing the next strtok.e either, let CK do it the "true
> euphorian"
> way.
>
> > > So welcome to Euphoria, Ken! Put on a manic clown face like CK's (not that
> > > he is a manic clown, i did not say that) so you'll be well liked, and be
> > > prepared to wait forever for requested features. Yes, Euphoria is better
> > > than most languages, but it still has holes in it. Just sit back and take
> > > what you are given, don't rock the boat.
> >
> > The problem is we can't even agree on which are holes, or how big they are.
>
> Oh come on! One look at the offshoots of Eu over the years should demo the
> huge
> holes Eu has, starting with OOEU, then Bach, way back to the stuff David Cuny
> did, all those preprocessors and parsers, etc.. RDS said they'd be happy if
> someone did a debugger in a gui way, so you did one, and it wasn't jumped on!
> IIRC, someone did a gui debugger in another programming language once too.
> It's
> extremely disappointing. Instead of "yes, you can do that in Eu", you get "i
> wonder if that can be done in Eu." Other languages are starting up with some
> form of unicode built in, but despite being asked for in Eu, it's a debate as
> to if it's worthwhile?? How arrogantly american to tell all the rest of the
> world to 7bit ascii-zise their languages or get lost!
>
> I figure this is my last rant, i am tired of wasting my breath and time.
>
> Kat
While I have been here for 6 years only I think, watched quite a few rants and
requests from you (and agreeing with I'd say 60% of them) being consistently
rejected, and definitively shared this frustrating experience of banging head
against a wall of inertia, minimalism and sometimes sheer ignorance, I can tell
you that it is not hopeless.
If I started Æ a few years ago, and left it to dust later, it was because I was
appalled by the rejection of features that are (soon were) so conspicuously
missing. I can tell you that, last automn, I was about to leave this forum for
good, as I was not developing anything in Eu any longer.
Then there has been the hasty release of win32lib 70.1, where I had put some
work; I had to take care. And now that some prominent conservatives don't appear
to be around anymore, we have this upheaval leading to 4.0 taking place, and
parts of that wretched Æ code is now being merged (by me) into 4.0.
So... while I certainly understand the irritation (a stronger term could be more
appropriate, I bet), because I have felt it for so long, the fact is that drastic
changes are taking place. Perhaps are we mutating from a dandy language to a
certainly elegant, but far more practical, language.
While there is opposition (but not as fierce as it once was) to goto, and while
I'm afraid a native (wchar[] like) string type would be possible only with a
massive rewrite of the interpreter, other areas are probably much mor open than
they have ever been. I think an improved debugger or string execution are part of
them.
Whether those could make it in 4.0 alpha, 4.0 stable or 4.1 is a timetable
issue. I dare to say practicality is starting to win over modern art in shaping
Eu design. As far as I'm concerned, I keep on pushing.
CChris
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
